get_devbox

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

The description indicates a read-only operation via 'retrieve', but with no annotations provided, it carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention error handling, authentication requirements, or what happens if the id is invalid or not found, leaving the agent with limited guidance beyond the basic read intent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

This is a simple get-by-id tool with one parameter and an output schema, so the description is functionally adequate. However, with no annotations, a bit more context about usage or behavior would improve completeness; still, given the tool's simplicity, it earns a 4.

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 100%, so the parameter devbox_id is fully documented in the schema. The description's 'by id' adds no extra semantic nuance beyond what is already stated, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Retrieve' and identifies the resource 'devbox' with a clear scope 'single devbox by id'. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_devboxes (plural) and create_devbox/update_devbox.

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?

Usage is implied: you need a devbox_id to get details. However, there is no explicit mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_devboxes, nor any exclusion criteria or prerequisites.

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