get_api_detail

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what constitutes 'detailed specifications'. It only says it queries specs, which is insufficient for full transparency.

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 concise with a single purpose sentence followed by parameter descriptions. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediately useful example values. No redundant or irrelevant content.

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's simplicity (2 string params, output schema exists), the description is adequate but not thorough. It lacks usage context, output structure hints (though output schema covers that), and any explanation of 'detailed specifications'. Missing guidance on when to use over siblings.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description adds meaning by providing concrete examples for both parameters: service ('bcs', 'vm', 'vpc') and endpoint_id ('create-instance', 'list-volumes'). This helps the agent understand plausible values beyond the schema's plain string type.

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 queries detailed specifications of a specific KakaoCloud API endpoint ('특정 카카오클라우드 API 엔드포인트의 상세 스펙을 조회한다'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_auth_guide', 'get_service_overview', 'get_workflow', and 'search_kakaocloud_api' by focusing on a specific endpoint's specs.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or conditions for effectiveness. Sibling tools are present but not referenced.

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