rabbitmq_broker_get_policy

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is minimal. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, side effects, error conditions, or required permissions. This is insufficient for a mutation-unrelated tool without 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 a single sentence that is concise, but it borders on under-specification. It communicates the core action but lacks detail that could be added without much verbosity. It earns its place but could be more informative.

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?

Given no output schema and sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the return value (expected policy structure) or possible errors (e.g., policy not found). The context of the tool within the RabbitMQ broker API is not leveraged to provide completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for parameters. The description does not add any meaning to parameters beyond their names. It fails to explain what 'name' refers to or how 'vhost' defaults, leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 states 'Get a specific policy by name' which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'rabbitmq_broker_list_policies' which lists all policies.

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 the tool is for retrieving a single policy by name, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., list_policies for listing all, or other retrieval tools). No when-not or alternative guidance provided.

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