status

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Although no annotations are provided, the description uses the verb 'report,' which strongly implies a read-only operation with no side effects. It also specifies what data is returned (messages indexed, errors), making the tool's behavior transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences. It conveys all necessary information without any redundant or extraneous text, making it easy to parse and understand.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description provides a complete picture: it lists the specific health metrics returned and states the condition under which to invoke the tool. Since there is no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and when to use it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% with no additional parameters to explain. The absence of parameters is inherently clear from the schema, so no further description is needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: reporting sync health per account with specific metrics (first full sync, last successful sync, messages indexed, errors, backoff). The verb 'report' and the resource 'sync health' are specific, distinguishing it from siblings like search or show.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit guidance is given on when to call this tool: 'Call this when results look incomplete or to check whether the server is fully functional yet.' This leaves no ambiguity about its intended use case.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.