hosts_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the name - no mention of behavior when the UUID is unknown (error vs empty), permissions required, or whether the response includes tags/config relationships. For a one-line description this is minimal but not contradictory.

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?

A single five-word sentence with the key information front-loaded and zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple single-parameter read, though it is arguably under-specified rather than truly concise.

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 one-param read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the minimum needed to invoke correctly. It lacks any error behavior, permission notes, or cross-reference to how to obtain a UUID, leaving some gaps for an agent operating among ~20 host-related siblings.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning; it does identify the input as a host UUID, which is the essential semantic. However, it adds nothing about format expectations or the identifier's origin (e.g. from hosts_list) beyond what the name already implies.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (host) plus the lookup key (UUID), so the agent knows exactly what the call returns. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like hosts_list or hosts_get-equivalents (e.g. node_integrations_get, squads_get), but the retrieval-by-identifier intent is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus hosts_list (enumerating hosts) or hosts_update/hosts_delete which also take a host identifier. The agent must infer the situation from the tool name alone.

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