get_load_balancer_details

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes what information is returned but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation or disclose any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Well-structured with a main sentence followed by bullet lists for functions and use cases, plus explicit Args and Returns sections. Front-loaded with purpose, but bullet lists could be slightly more concise.

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 the tool has 1 parameter with good semantic coverage and a promised output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and how to call it. It is complete for the complexity level.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning: 'lb_name_or_id: Load balancer name or ID to query'. This clarifies that the parameter accepts both name and ID, beyond the schema's minimal type definition.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves detailed information about a specific OpenStack load balancer, listing specific components like VIP, listeners, pools, members, and health monitors. Distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on individual components.

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 explicit use case examples like 'Show details for load balancer [name/id]' and 'What's the status of load balancer [name]?'. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the specificity implies alternatives exist for narrower queries.

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