It Get Sdi Channel Info

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It signals a read-style operation ('Show current...') and explicitly discloses that the sensitive cert_password is not exposed, which prevents an agent from expecting it in the response. It could additionally state that it makes no changes, but the zero-parameter read-only wording makes that reasonably clear.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence adds an important non-obvious detail (cert_password is not exposed). No filler or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read-only inspection tool with an output schema available, the description covers the key output fields and explicitly warns about an absent field. It does not describe when to use this instead of it__check_sdi_status, but the near-complete coverage of behavior and the simple no-parameter surface make it largely sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameterschen, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter semantics. Output fields are listed in the description, which is the relevant behavioral disclosure for a no-input getter. This exceeds the baseline for parameter count of 0.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and a clear resource ('current SDI channel configuration'), then enumerates the exact fields returned (environment, channel type, endpoint URL, certificate status). This is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like submit/check/parse operations, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 clearly implies this is a read-only inspection tool useful before configuring or submitting to the SDI, but it does not state explicit when-to-use conditions or name alternatives for related operations such as checking SDI status. The context is clear enough, but a 'use this when you need to verify current channel settings' statement would improve routing.

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