combell_scheduled_tasks_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no further behavioral context such as return shape, not-found behavior, or authentication constraints. It is consistent with annotations but contributes little beyond them.

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, compact sentence with no filler. The core identifying information is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simple read-only get tool, the description is minimally viable, but it leaves gaps: it does not explain the role of domain_name, nor how scheduled_task_id is scoped to a Linux hosting. Annotations cover safety, but parameter semantics and usage boundaries remain under-specified.

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%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It only says 'by id,' which weakly clarifies scheduled_task_id, but it does not explain what domain_name means in this context or how the two parameters relate. An agent cannot fully disambiguate the required inputs from the description alone.

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 ('Get'), a specific resource ('scheduled task'), a scope ('of a Linux hosting'), and an identifier ('by id'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list, create, update, and delete.

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 'by id' phrasing implies this tool is for fetching a single scheduled task once the ID is known, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over combell_scheduled_tasks_list or other alternatives. Usage is inferred, not stated.

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