sdcloud_get_nat_policy_state

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic function. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether authentication or specific permissions are required, or what happens if the policy_id does not exist. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise at one sentence, providing the core purpose efficiently. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it could include more detail without being overly verbose.

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 lack of an output schema and the presence of two parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not indicate what the return value looks like or how the optional parameter affects the response. This leaves the agent guessing about the output structure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters, but it mentions none. The two parameters (policy_id and include_assigned_devices) are not described at all, leaving the agent with no information about their meaning or format.

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 specifies the action (Get) and the resource (deployment state of a NAT policy), with concrete examples of possible states (up to date, pending, out of sync). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sdcloud_get_nat_policy (which likely retrieves configuration) and sdcloud_deploy_nat_policy.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to check deployment state via sdcloud_get_nat_policy or other monitoring tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions.

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