get_monitor

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'with detailed information', failing to mention that it can include logs, response times, alert contacts, or maintenance windows, nor any default behaviors or potential performance implications. It is not misleading but is minimally informative.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action ('Get a single monitor by ID') and efficiently communicates the core purpose.

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 output schema exists, return values are documented. The description covers the essential purpose, though it does not explicitly mention the optional embedded sub-resources (logs, response times, etc.) that are available via parameters. It is adequate but not rich for a tool with 7 optional parameters.

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 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, including defaults and purpose. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage is appropriate.

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 states 'Get a single monitor by ID' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling 'get_monitors' (plural) and other monitor-related operations, leaving no ambiguity about its singleton scope.

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 use for fetching a specific monitor's details, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over get_monitors or get_monitor_logs, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative guidance. The context is clear enough, but the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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