Retrieve point-in-time recovery status

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it calls GET /postgres/{postgresId}/recovery, which is consistent but does not reveal additional behavioral traits like response format or error conditions.

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 short but slightly repetitive ('Retrieve point-in-time recovery status' and 'Retrieve information on the availability...'). It is front-loaded but could be condensed into one sentence without losing 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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter, clear annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately specifies the action and API endpoint. It covers the core purpose but lacks detail on the output structure or what 'availability' entails.

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 has one parameter 'postgresId' with 0% documentation coverage. The description mentions 'by ID' and the API endpoint includes {postgresId}, providing implicit meaning but no explicit format or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the low coverage.

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 the action ('retrieve'), the resource ('point-in-time recovery status for a Postgres instance'), and includes the API endpoint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like render_retrieve_postgres or render_get_replication_lag by specifying the exact recovery status.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as render_retrieve_postgres or render_retrieve_postgres_connection_info. No context on prerequisites or exclusions is given.

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