Get a Lineage 2 private server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses case-insensitive exact matching and that the response includes description and labels, but it does not describe no-match behavior, error responses, or explicitly confirm that this is a read-only operation.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the core action and scoping, with no filler. Every phrase contributes meaning.

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 should clarify the return value, and it does so at a high level by saying 'full public record... including description and labels.' However, it omits no-match behavior, how the optional chronicle parameter narrows the lookup, and explicit guidance to use search_servers when the exact name is unknown.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by clarifying exact, case-insensitive name matching, which the schema does not state. It does not add extra meaning for the optional chronicle parameter, but the name semantics are a genuine improvement.

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 clear verb and resource: return the full public record of a single server. The qualifier 'by its exact name' distinguishes this from list_servers and search_servers, which are siblings with different lookup semantics.

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 implies the tool should be used when the caller has an exact server name, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer search_servers or list_servers instead. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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