get_heat_stack_details

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, disclose any permission requirements, or explain how the section parameter changes behavior or defaults; it only lists possible section labels tersely.

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?

Very compact and front-loaded, with no filler. The second sentence is telegraphic ('section: resources, events, template, outputs.') but still readable and appropriately sized for a simple lookup.

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 two-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and the section choices, but leaves gaps around read-only behavior and section semantics. It is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 must compensate. It does add meaning by clarifying that stack_name accepts a name or ID and by listing section values (resources, events, template, outputs), but it does not explain what each section returns or that section defaults to 'resources'.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('Heat stack') and notes retrieval is by name or ID. It is clearly a detail-fetch tool distinct from the list-oriented sibling get_heat_stacks, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus get_heat_stacks or other stack tools, and states no exclusions or preconditions. Usage is only implied by 'Query a Heat stack'.

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