get-service-definition

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves a service definition, implying a read operation, but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., missing serviceName), permissions, or rate limits. Basic transparency is present but lacks depth.

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 efficient sentence followed by representative example queries. Every part adds value, with no redundancy or 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?

The tool is simple and the description adequately explains its purpose and usage. However, it lacks details about the return format or structure, which would be helpful since there is no output schema. Overall, it is sufficient but not fully comprehensive.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (serviceName: 'The service name to look up', schemaVersion: 'Schema version...'). The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a single service definition by name from the Service Catalog, with explicit example queries like 'show service X details' and 'what team owns service Y'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as 'list-service-definitions'.

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 provides clear usage context through example queries, indicating when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the associated sibling list implies the contrasting list function.

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