service_inspect

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so description adds value by detailing what the tool returns (desired-state spec, rollout status, full service document with 'UpdateStatus' during rolling updates). No contradictions.

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?

Efficiently uses ~8 sentences covering purpose, prerequisites, alternatives, parameters, and return format. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

For a simple read-only inspection tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, prerequisites, parameter meanings, return format, and distinguishes from related tools. No gaps.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains both parameters: id_or_name as 'The service id or name' and insert_defaults as 'Merge default values into the output', adding meaningful context.

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?

Clearly states 'Get a swarm service by id or name', uses specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like service_ps and a computed rollout summary resource.

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?

Explicitly mentions prerequisite ('Must run against a swarm manager') and provides clear alternatives for different use cases (service_ps for running tasks, service-tasks resource for rollout summary).

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