endpoint_show

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full burden. It states it returns a dict with details, implying a read operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm read-only, mention authentication needs, or discuss side effects. Adequate for a simple lookup tool.

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 brief, well-structured with a summary line, args section, returns section, and an example. Every part is relevant and no redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter meaning, return fields, and provides an example. It is complete for its simplicity.

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, but the description explains the param as 'The UUID of the endpoint' and provides an example call. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 'Get detailed information about a specific endpoint', specifying the verb 'Get' and the resource 'endpoint'. The example further clarifies usage with a UUID. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'endpoint_search' (search) and 'compute_endpoint_list' (list).

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 implies when to use (have an endpoint UUID) but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like endpoint_search or compute_endpoint_list. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites. Minimal but not absent.

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