cosmosdb_get_container_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses that this is a read-only metadata retrieval operation, listing system properties (_self, _etag, _ts). It does not mention permissions, cost implications, or failure scenarios, but the core behavioral trait (non-destructive read) is clear.

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, with two short paragraphs. The first sentence states the primary purpose, followed by a bullet-like list of returned metadata. The second paragraph adds a useful usage hint. Every sentence is valuable with no redundancy.

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 simple parameter set (3 required strings) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality. It lists the returned fields, which complements the output schema. It could mention required permissions or that the tool returns system properties, but overall it is fairly complete.

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%, but the description adds meaning for the 'account' parameter by noting it can be a short name or full endpoint URL. However, 'database' and 'container' parameters receive no additional explanation beyond their names, leaving ambiguity in the context of Cosmos DB.

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 metadata for a Cosmos DB container, listing specific fields like partition key path and indexing policy. It is easily distinguishable from siblings such as cosmosdb_list_containers (which lists containers) and cosmosdb_read_item (which reads an item), as this tool focuses on container-level metadata.

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 provides a usage hint about the account parameter (short name or full URL) but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cosmosdb_list_containers or cosmosdb_query_items. It does not mention prerequisites or common use cases.

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