get_cloud_incident

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so read-only behavior is covered. The description adds value by explaining the matching behavior (accepts ID or partial title, case-insensitive), but does not address edge cases like when both parameters are provided.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then matching logic, then exclusions. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured.

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 low complexity (two optional params, no output schema, clear annotations), the description covers purpose, usage, matching behavior, and sibling differentiation adequately, though it could mention what happens if both id and title are provided.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (100% coverage), and the description adds semantic context: parameters are alternatives, and title match is case-insensitive partial. This goes beyond the schema alone.

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 states 'view details of a specific cloud platform incident' with a clear verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cloud_incidents and get_anomalies.

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 explicitly states when to use (user wants details of a specific incident) and when not to use (listing all incidents or anomalies), with alternative tool names provided.

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