gorelo_get_asset

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read, so the description is not the sole carrier of behavior. It adds nothing about not-found behavior, id format expectations, or whether the response includes related hardware/assignment data, which would have earned a higher score.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter read-only getter with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what is needed to call it correctly. Only minor gaps (what distinguishes an agent asset from custom assets, not-found behavior) remain.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema ('Device identifier'), so the description need not repeat it. It also doesn't add format, prefix, or lookup-key nuance beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (Gets) and resource (a single agent/managed-device asset) scoped by id, and the parenthetical clarifies that 'agent' equals a managed device, which helps separate it from gorelo_get_custom_asset. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it contrasts with.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives such as gorelo_list_assets (bulk listing) or gorelo_get_custom_asset (a different asset family). The agent must infer the routing from the word 'single' alone.

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