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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'on your account' as a scoping detail, but this is somewhat redundant and does not disclose additional behavior like what data is returned or authentication requirements.

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 short and front-loaded with the key phrase 'Get specific object storage by its id'. The second clause is somewhat redundant but not overly verbose, making it efficient overall.

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 simple GET-by-ID tool, the description is minimally sufficient, but it lacks an output schema and does not describe what fields of the object storage will be returned. Given the 0% schema coverage, a bit more detail about the response would make it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies objectStorageId via 'by its id'. It doesn't explain required x-request-id or optional x-trace-id, which are likely request metadata and could confuse the agent about whether they are path/body parameters. This under-compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resource ('specific object storage by its id'), distinguishing it from list and audit retrieval siblings. It explicitly says 'by its id' making the scope precise.

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 phrase 'by its id' provides clear context that this tool is for fetching a single object storage when the ID is known, contrasting with list/audit alternatives. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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