get_resource_limits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with that by using 'Get'. The description adds useful context by listing the specific limits returned, which goes beyond the annotations. No negative behavioral traits are disclosed, but none are needed for a read-only operation with an output schema.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the list of returned attributes is concise and informative. No unnecessary words or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are already defined. The optional parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description clearly states what the tool does, and annotations cover safety. For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, this is complete.

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%: the only parameter (database_name) has a clear description including its default value. The tool description does not mention the parameter, but the schema already fully documents it. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the description adds no additional parameter semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource ('Azure resource governance limits') followed by an explicit enumeration of what is returned (max CPU%, IOPS, log rate, memory, workers, service tier/objective). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_database_configuration or get_resource_stats_history, which target different aspects.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when you need Azure resource governance limits. No explicit exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, but the purpose is unambiguous. Given the large sibling set, a note about when not to use it (e.g., for historical stats) would have been beneficial, but it's not a critical gap.

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