discoverDiscover InfraPulse production capabilities and the universal execution contract without changing account state.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | No | ||
| data | No | ||
| error | No | ||
| intent | No | ||
| status | No | ||
| receipt | No | ||
| success | No | ||
| request_id | No | ||
| next_action | No | ||
| operation_id | No | ||
| requires_human | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior; the description reinforces this with 'without changing account state.' It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations, mainly scoping the discovery to production capabilities and the execution contract.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the primary purpose and the key safety property efficiently.
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?
Given the zero-parameter schema, rich safety annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete for an agent to safely invoke this discovery tool. No critical contextual information is missing.
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 input schema has zero parameters and full coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. Per the zero-parameter baseline, this is acceptable and requires no additional explanation.
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 job: discover InfraPulse production capabilities and the universal execution contract. It uses a specific verb and resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as connect or execute.
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 'without changing account state' provides clear context that this is a safe, read-only discovery tool, appropriate for orientation before state-changing operations. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among the sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct phase or concern: discovery, quoting, authorization, execution, connection management, and receipt verification. There is no meaningful overlap between tool responsibilities.
Most tool names are single imperative verbs (authorize, connect, discover, execute, quote), which is consistent and predictable. verify_receipt breaks the pattern slightly by using verb_noun, but the intent remains clear.
Six tools is a well-scoped set for a workflow-oriented infrastructure API. Each tool maps to a clear stage in the operation lifecycle without redundancy.
The core lifecycle is well covered: discover, quote, authorize, execute, and verify_receipt. Minor gaps exist around canceling authorizations or revoking connections, but these are not critical to the primary execution workflow.