sr_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the '[READ]' tag merely restates that. The description adds no behavioral context beyond safety — no error behavior for a bad uuid, no note on what the detail contains, no permission requirements. Little value beyond the annotation.

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?

Front-loaded with the operation summary, followed by a compact Args block for the two params. No filler sentences, though the '[READ]' prefix is redundant with the annotation.

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 single-resource read with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is adequate on parameters. It falls short on what the returned detail contains and failure behavior, which an agent calling with a uuid would benefit from knowing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden, and it does document both parameters: sr_id as the SR uuid (pointing to sr_list for lookup) and target as the Xen Orchestra target name from config with 'omit for the default'. This meaningfully compensates for the empty 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Detail for one SR by uuid'), and the singular 'one SR' versus the sibling sr_list makes the scope distinction immediately clear. An agent can identify this as the single-resource read without opening the schema.

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 parenthetical '(see sr_list)' routes the agent to the sibling for obtaining a uuid, which is useful implied guidance. However, it never states when to use this over other SR-related siblings (sr_usage_rca, sr_rescan) or any preconditions.

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