get_zfs_pool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get details' and lists arguments, but does not indicate that this is a read-only operation, any required permissions, or potential side effects.

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 very concise, using two sentences and an argument list. It could be slightly more structured, but it is efficient and avoids fluff.

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 tool has two parameters and an output schema (though not described), the description lacks details about what 'details' are returned (e.g., properties, status). It also fails to connect to sibling tools. The description is too minimal to fully enable an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description adds some meaning by naming the parameters ('node: The node name', 'name: ZFS pool name'). However, it does not provide constraints, formats, or examples, which would be helpful for correct usage.

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 'Get details of a ZFS pool', which is a specific verb (get) and resource (ZFS pool details). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_zfs_pools' which lists all pools, and 'create_zfs_pool' which creates a pool.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_zfs_pools' for browsing pools. It does not mention prerequisites or context for using this tool.

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