get_instance_details

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly lists the return fields (instance_id, region, status, version, etc.), indicating a safe read operation. No side effects are mentioned, but that's expected. It could mention error conditions or prerequisites, but the provided detail is sufficient.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence, followed by a structured list of return fields. It is concise and easy to scan, though it could be slightly more compact by using a table or bullet list.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no complex behavior), the description fully covers the returned information and purpose. It lists all relevant fields, and with the output schema presumably available, it is complete enough for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, and the description implicitly confirms this by stating it returns instance details without any input. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no additional parameter info is needed.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves watsonx.data instance information including status, version, region, and enabled features. It uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'instance information', and distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on engines, ingestion, schemas, etc.

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?

Description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the context implies it's for instance-level info, no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned. Sibling tools are other getters/lists, but the description lacks usage context.

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