vast42_get_companion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states 'Get', which is already implied by the tool name, and provides no additional information about error handling, response structure, authentication, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 a single, concise sentence of six words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool, and the key information ('Get', 'single', 'VAST 4.2 companion') is front-loaded with no unnecessary words.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sufficient for basic retrieval but lacks contextual details such as what a 'VAST 4.2 companion' is or what data the response contains. However, the low complexity justifies a high completeness score, as the core purpose is clear.

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 provides a complete description for the single parameter ('VAST 4.2 companion ID'), so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already describes, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 operation ('Get') and the specific resource ('a single VAST 4.2 companion'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like vast42_list_companions (returns multiple) and vast42_create_companion (creates a new one). The scope ('single') indicates retrieval by a specific ID.

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?

The description implies usage when you need a specific companion by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus list/get alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is minimal and indirect.

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