grok doctor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that it runs read-only (`--json`, never fix) and returns JSON, which largely restates the annotation. It does not disclose side effects, timing, or environment requirements beyond the fix exclusion.

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?

Two terse sentences, front-loaded with the exact command and the key constraint. Every phrase earns its place with no padding.

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 with no output schema, the description conveys enough to invoke correctly: what command runs, that it is read-only, and that it returns JSON. Return-value structure is not elaborated but is implied by '--json'.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify regarding inputs.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: run `grok doctor --json` for diagnostics. The 'doctor' framing and 'diagnostic JSON' clearly convey the tool's purpose. However, it does not differentiate itself from the many sibling grok_* tools beyond the diagnostic framing.

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 parenthetical '(never doctor fix)' gives an explicit exclusion, steering the agent away from a mutating variant. It stops short of naming sibling tools or broader when-to-use conditions, but the command-level constraint is clear guidance.

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