get_infra_provider

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's '[READ]' simply restates that. It adds the HTTP endpoint, which is routing metadata rather than behavioral context, and says nothing about not-found behavior or what the response contains.

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 short lines with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. Efficient, though the bracketed route line adds little value for an agent.

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 trivial single-parameter lookup with no output schema, this is close to adequate, but the absence of any error/not-found semantics or guidance relative to the sibling list tool leaves a small but real gap.

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%, so the description should compensate. It only says 'by uuid', adding no format, validation, or lookup semantics beyond the parameter name and the schema's own uuid pattern.

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 (get) and resource (infra provider) scoped to a single uuid lookup. The singular form plausibly distinguishes it from the sibling list tool get_infra_providers, though the description never names that sibling 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus get_infra_providers or the other infra-billing tools (get_infra_billing_nodes, get_infra_billing_records). The agent must infer that 'by uuid' means a single-record fetch.

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