scf_get_system

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

The description adds viewer-role access context and enumerates the returned data fields, which complements the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not describe error behavior or 404 handling, but for a simple read tool with readOnlyHint=true, the disclosed behavior is adequate.

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 sentence that front-loads the operation and resource, then lists the returned fields. Every element earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 get-by-id tool, the description is complete: it states the role requirement, the exact returned fields, and the schema documents how to obtain both required IDs. No output schema exists, but the description fills that gap by enumerating the response content.

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 100% and both parameters have helpful provenance notes ('obtain from scf_list_organizations' / 'obtain from scf_list_systems'). The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('one system from the organization's inventory'), and the exact fields returned, which distinguishes it from scf_list_systems and scf_create_system/update_system. The parenthetical read note further clarifies its non-mutating nature.

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 makes the use case clear: retrieve a single system when you already have org_id and system_id, and it signals viewer-role access. It does not explicitly name alternatives like scf_list_systems, but the singular 'Get one system' versus the sibling list tool provides sufficient context.

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