Get service

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently describes the core action and the data returned, which is adequate for a read-only getter. It does not cover error behavior for unknown service names or access requirements, but these are not critical for this simple operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that names the action, the target, and the returned fields. There is no filler, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 low-complexity getter with an output schema, the description covers the essential return payload and the input's role. It omits explicit guidance against listing use cases, but the word 'one' and the catalogue focus make the selection context sufficiently 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 has only a 'name' string with no description (0% coverage). The description indirectly clarifies that 'name' identifies the service whose catalogue entry is returned, adding some meaning. It does not specify exact-name matching, case sensitivity, or format, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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 a specific verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('one service's catalogue entry'), and enumerates the concrete contents (tier, team, dependencies, SLOs, repo). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_services and check_service_health.

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: call this to fetch a single service's catalogue details. However, it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over list_services or check_service_health, nor does it mention any alternatives or exclusions.

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