Get a server

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds useful behavioral detail about the 'full' detail mode expanding the response to include egg, node, and owner records. No side effects or contradictions are hidden.

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 concise sentences deliver the core action, identifier options, and detail behavior without redundancy. The structure is clean and front-loaded with the primary 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?

Without an output schema, the description provides enough context by contrasting summary versus full response content. It omits error/not-found behavior but is acceptable for a read-only get operation with clear annotations.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful semantics: it clarifies that 'server' may be a UUID, short UUID, or external ID, that 'by' selects the identifier type, and that 'detail' controls payload verbosity with concrete examples of what 'full' includes.

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 the exact resource (a single server) and the retrieval action, with supported identifiers (UUID, short UUID, external ID). It clearly differentiates from list_servers and get_server_resource by focusing on fetching one server and describing optional full detail.

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?

Clearly indicates when to use by specifying 'Fetch one server' and explaining the identifier modes and detail option. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like list_servers, but the singular 'one server' and detail semantics provide strong implicit guidance.

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