komodo_get_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a read that returns configuration and status, which is useful, but it says nothing about authentication requirements, error behavior for invalid IDs, or whether the operation has side effects.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by short Args/Returns sections with no filler. The Args/Returns scaffolding is slightly heavier than needed for a single-parameter tool but earns its place by documenting the param and return.

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 single-parameter read tool, the description is nearly sufficient: purpose, parameter name, and a return summary are all present, and an output schema exists so return structure needn't be detailed. The missing pieces are param sourcing and auth/error context.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it labels the parameter as 'Server ID', which adds meaning beyond the bare string type. However, it doesn't indicate format, where to obtain the ID (e.g., from komodo_list_servers), or whether it is a name or numeric ID.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about a specific server.' This clearly separates it from komodo_list_servers (plural listing) and the create/update/delete server siblings, though it doesn't name those alternatives explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'specific' — an agent can infer this is for fetching one server's details versus listing many. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite (e.g., valid server ID source) guidance.

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