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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, it discloses the security-relevant behavior that 'Key material is never returned', which prevents an agent from promising secrets to a user. It also previews the shape of the return payload, useful since no output schema exists, though it says nothing about permissions or error behavior for a bad id.

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?

Three short sentences with the purpose front-loaded, followed by the security caveat and the discovery hint. No filler, no redundancy with the title or schema.

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?

With no output schema present, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by listing the fields returned. Combined with the id-discovery hint and the key-material caveat, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single bucket_id parameter is already fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The description only adds that ids originate from list_object_storage_buckets, which the schema itself already states — no additional meaning is layered on.

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 ('Show one') and resource ('object storage bucket'), then immediately enumerates the returned fields (provider, region, bucket name, endpoint, credential, status, error excerpt). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling list_object_storage_buckets, which it names explicitly.

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?

Gives the discovery path for the required id ('Discover bucket ids with list_object_storage_buckets'), which is exactly the prerequisite an agent needs. It stops short of stating when-not to use it or what to do if the bucket is missing, so it is clear context but not full when/when-not coverage.

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