Get Hudu API Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds valuable context: no IDs needed, only a valid key, returns only two fields, and explains the 404-vs-nonexistent ambiguity. This enriches the agent's understanding beyond the structured hints.

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 well-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose. All sentences provide value except the final 'Operation class: Read' which redundantly echoes annotations, but it is a minor inefficiency.

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 diagnostic tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what it returns, when to use it, why it's useful, and its minimal requirements. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a well-described optional parameter (response_format). The tool description itself does not mention this parameter, but the schema fully documents it, so the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'Report the version and build date of the Hudu instance'. It specifies the exact output (version and date) and nothing else, which distinguishes it from all sibling CRUD tools.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Call this first whenever something behaves unexpectedly' and explains why in detail (API version differences, 404 ambiguity, confirming base URL/API key). This gives clear when-to-use guidance, even without naming alternatives.

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