get_module_info

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently reports what information the tool returns (installation status, version, discovered components). It also implies a read-only nature by describing documentation retrieval, though it does not mention error cases or side effects.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a brief summary of output content and the parameter explanation. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema and a single parameter, the description is mostly complete. It explains what the output will contain and the parameter format. It could be more complete by positioning itself against sibling tools, but that gap is minor for a simple info retrieval tool.

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 only defines module_name as a string with no description. The description adds significant meaning by explaining what the parameter is and providing concrete examples ('clearskies-aws', 'clearskies-graphql', 'clearskies-snyk'), making it easy for an agent to format the argument correctly.

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 action ('Get detailed documentation') and the resource ('specific clearskies extension module'). It specifies what will be shown (installation status, version, components with descriptions and parameters), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_modules or get_module_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?

The description implies it is for a specific module rather than listing all modules, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like explain_module or get_module_components. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided, leaving usage somewhat inferred.

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