codex_app_doctor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly labels the operation as 'read-only', which is important safety information, but it does not mention side effects, prerequisites, permissions, or what the output looks like. Some value is added, but more context would be needed for full transparency.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key action and lists the diagnostic categories clearly. Every word contributes to understanding, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a parameterless diagnostic tool, the scope is well defined by naming the four diagnostic categories. The main gap is the absence of any mention of the output format or return behavior, which would help the agent know what to expect after invocation. However, given the low complexity and empty schema, the description is reasonably complete.

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 accepts zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description correctly does not attempt to describe parameters. Baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses a clear verb ('Run') and specifies the exact resource: read-only diagnostics for app-server, account, config-requirements, and Windows sandbox-readiness. It also distinguishes itself from related tools by explicitly stating 'without invoking codex doctor', making its unique role evident.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool—when read-only diagnostics are needed and codex doctor should be avoided—but it does not explicitly state alternative tools or provide a clear when-not-to-use scenario. The context is present but only implicitly.

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