surfmeter_get_clients

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns a bounded page, includes total and next_offset pagination metadata, and only shows 'visible' clients. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand response shape and scoping.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The primary behavior (get by id or list) is front-loaded, and the pagination metadata note is a valuable addition. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only list/get tool with strong annotations and a clear description, this is nearly complete. The only minor gap is that it doesn't explicitly state what 'visible' means (e.g., permission-scoped clients), but that is a domain nuance rather than a critical omission. No output schema exists, so the description's mention of total and next_offset is helpful.

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 only 33% (only 'id' has a description). The description clarifies that 'id' is optional and switches between single-get and list mode, and that limit/offset control pagination. However, it doesn't add detail about limit bounds or offset semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the description partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Surfmeter client'), and explicitly distinguishes the two modes: single client by id vs. bounded page of visible clients. It also mentions pagination metadata, which helps differentiate it from sibling search tools like surfmeter_search_anomalies or surfmeter_search_measurements.

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 when to use this tool: supply an id for a single client, or omit it to list a page. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list makes the distinction clear enough. A small gap is that it doesn't say when to prefer surfmeter_search_* tools over this one.

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