get_facility

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by detailing the exact data returned (e.g., power capacity, cooling type, fiber providers), which is behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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 highly concise: one list of returned fields, two example calls, and one usage caution. Every sentence is essential and well-structured, front-loading the most important information.

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 that there is no output schema, the description compensates by listing the fields returned, making the expected output clear. With 6 parameters all described in the schema, the description provides sufficient context for correct use, including explicit disambiguation from a sibling tool.

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% and each parameter already has a description. The description adds value by providing example usages (e.g., 'get_facility id=equinix-dc1-ashburn') that illustrate how parameters like 'id' and 'slug' are used. This aids in correct invocation beyond the schema.

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 tool retrieves 'full metadata for one facility' and lists the specific fields returned (name, operator, address, etc.). It distinguishes from the sibling 'search_facilities' by explicitly noting this tool is for single facility lookups, not searching or listing many.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Returns ONE facility in full; do NOT use to search or list many facilities (use search_facilities).' It also includes concrete examples with parameter values, showing how to call with 'id' or 'slug'.

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