cloud_insts_get_con

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The phrase 'Get instance console URL' implies a read operation, but there is no explicit statement that the tool does not modify state, and no disclosure of potential failures or limits beyond the ID resolution note.

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 structured with a one-line purpose, a parameter list, and a note. However, the parameter list is incomplete (missing required params), and the note is lengthy but contains valuable information. It could be more concise if it integrated the required parameter descriptions.

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 no output schema, the description minimally states the output is a console URL but does not elaborate on format. The note aids in parameter resolution but does not cover error conditions, console type values, or behavior when parameters are invalid. The missing required parameter descriptions significantly reduce completeness.

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 'Args' section documents only optional parameters (console_type, extra_headers, etc.) but omits the three required parameters (instance_id, project_id, region_id). The schema covers them but without descriptions, and the description fails to define what these required fields represent, leaving ambiguity.

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 opens with 'Get instance console URL', which clearly states the action and resource. While sibling tools include many instance operations, this one is distinctly about retrieving a console URL. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings or mention that it is a read-only operation.

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 note provides guidance on resolving numeric IDs from names or defaults, which helps the agent understand prerequisites. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cloud_insts_get' or 'cloud_insts_act', nor does it mention any exclusion criteria.

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