Get Service Types

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'available service types' entails. It doesn't contradict annotations, but offers minimal additional value given the annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 has annotations (readOnlyHint) and an output schema (which covers return values), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on usage relative to siblings and doesn't clarify what 'service types' are, leaving gaps in completeness for agent decision-making.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and one parameter ('params') that is loosely typed (any object or null), the description doesn't explain parameter usage. However, since there are zero required parameters and the schema allows null/default, the tool likely operates without inputs, making the lack of parameter details less critical. This justifies a baseline above minimum.

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') and resource ('available service types in Cisco NSO'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_services' or 'get_device_ned_ids', which might retrieve related but different data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_services' and 'get_device_ned_ids' that might retrieve similar or overlapping data, there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions to help the agent choose appropriately.

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