vsz_get_auth_server

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states a benign 'get' operation. It adds no context about error conditions (e.g., 404 for unknown server_id), authentication requirements, or rate limits. The behavior is simple and largely self-evident, but the description does not go beyond the basic action.

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 to the point, with a clear purpose statement and parameter explanations. The format is slightly boilerplate (with 'Args:' block), but every sentence is informative with no fluff. It could be slightly more polished, but it's appropriately concise.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. It fully describes both required parameters with context. The only minor omission is a pointer to list_auth_servers for discovering server IDs, but this is not essential for using the tool 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?

The schema provides only parameter names and types with no descriptions. The description compensates by explaining that 'host' is the vSZ controller IP or hostname and 'server_id' is the Auth server UUID. This adds meaningful semantic value, satisfying the requirement for 0% schema coverage.

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 it retrieves details of a specific authentication server, using the verb 'Get' and specifying the resource ('specific authentication server'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like vsz_list_auth_servers, which presumably lists all servers.

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 usage when you have a specific server_id (via the word 'specific'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisite steps like listing available auth servers to obtain the UUID. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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