Get Rack Storage

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description reveals that ids are not guessable and that Hudu answers 404 identically for a missing record and an unrouted path. It also clarifies the scope boundary with rack storage items, adding behavioral context not present in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the action sentence, followed by a concise definition, usage guidance, and an operation class note. Every sentence earns its place; no repetition or filler.

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 get-by-id tool, the description is complete: it defines the resource, explains how to obtain the id, warns about the 404 behavior, and distinguishes from item tools. With comprehensive schema and annotations, no critical information is missing.

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 schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to the 'id' parameter by noting it is numeric and must be obtained via list, which is valuable beyond the schema's 'Numeric Hudu id of the rack storage.'

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 opens with 'Fetch one rack storage by its numeric id,' a specific verb+resource statement. It further distinguishes the tool from the hudu_*_rack_storage_item tools by clarifying that rack storage is the container only, which disambiguates it from related 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?

It explicitly advises 'Use hudu_list_rack_storages first if you only know a name,' and explains the 404 ambiguity, giving the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance. This is a strong alternative-aware instruction.

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