computer_get_by_all_parameters

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, supports pagination, or returns a list of computers. The description is too brief to inform about parameters like 'pageSize', 'orderBy', or whether it filters by organization. Behavioral transparency is lacking.

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 (5 words) but at the expense of substance. It is a single phrase without structure or front-loading of key information. It could be expanded to include essential details without becoming lengthy.

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's complexity (15 body properties, optional headers, no output schema) the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain pagination parameters, search functionality, ordering, output format, or when to use this tool compared to get-for-edit. The agent needs more context to use this tool correctly.

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 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the tool's name. Baseline score of 3 applies since the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Load Computers By All Parameters' clearly states the verb 'Load' and resource 'Computers', indicating it retrieves computer data based on multiple parameters. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'computer_get_for_edit_by_id' which also loads computers but for editing. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation.

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 alternative computer retrieval tools (e.g., 'computer_get_for_edit_by_id'). There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or conditions where this tool is appropriate.

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