oci_kafka_get_work_request_errors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns error details but does not disclose side effects (e.g., read-only, idempotent) or required permissions. The description is adequate but not comprehensive for behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise: two sentences for purpose and usage, plus one line for the parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition. Front-loaded with the main action.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter) and has an output schema, so the description covers the key points: when to use it and what it returns. It could mention that errors are returned as a list, but the output schema likely handles that. Slightly incomplete but sufficient.

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 single parameter work_request_id is described as 'Work request OCID that failed', adding context beyond the schema's generic title. The word 'failed' clarifies it is only for failed work requests, which is valuable.

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 verb 'Get error details' and the resource 'failed OCI work request'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like oci_kafka_get_work_request and oci_kafka_get_work_request_logs by specifying it returns errors, not general status or logs.

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 explicitly says 'Call this when oci_kafka_get_work_request shows status FAILED', providing a clear condition. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the condition is sufficient and contextually implied.

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