get_platform

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention idempotency, error handling (e.g., what happens if the platform is not found), or any side effects. The description is too minimal to inform an agent about important behavioral aspects.

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 extremely concise, consisting of only two sentences and an args list. No extraneous information is included, and every part serves a purpose.

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 simplicity of the tool (single required parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks details such as return format, possible errors, or behavior when the platform does not exist. It meets the minimum but could be more complete.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage. The description compensates by adding an 'Args' section that explains the 'name' parameter with examples ('Platform name (e.g., Arvados, SevenBridges)'), providing meaning beyond the schema's bare title 'Name'.

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: 'Get a platform by name.' It uses a verb (Get) and a specific resource (platform), and the distinction from sibling tools like list_platforms is implied since get_platform targets a single platform by name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_platforms or create_platform. The description does not mention prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions.

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