picus_get_agent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses included fields (IP, NAT IP, update needed, attack modules, created_at) and format (epoch ms), but does not mention read-only nature or potential side effects. Adequate but not rich.

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 concise, using two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds useful detail. No unnecessary words.

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-agent retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose and return fields. It lacks error conditions or permissions, but is largely complete for its complexity.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must add meaning. It says 'by id' which matches the parameter name, but does not elaborate on format, constraints, or that it's required (already in schema). Minimal added value.

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 retrieves detailed configuration for a single agent by ID, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('agent'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that list agents or get other resources.

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 indicates it is used with an agent ID, but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives like picus_list_agents or provide usage exclusions. The guidance is implied but not explicit.

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