get_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states it 'gets metadata', implying a read-only operation, but does not mention error handling (e.g., nonexistent path), permissions, or what specific metadata fields are returned. This lack of detail is a gap, especially since no output schema exists to fill it.

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: one sentence for the purpose plus a parameter definition. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes only necessary information, with no 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal to be fully complete. It identifies the tool's purpose and parameter, but it does not describe the return format or any error behavior. For a simple metadata getter, this is a moderate gap — the agent can select it correctly but may not know what to expect in the response.

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 schema provides only a string parameter 'path' with no description (0% coverage). The description adds essential meaning by specifying that path is a 'relative path from the share root', which is crucial for constructing valid inputs. This fully compensates for the sparse schema, though it is brief.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'metadata about a file or directory on WD MyCloud'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_file (content) and list_directory (list entries).

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 usage context is implied: use this tool when you need metadata rather than file content or directory listings. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative to choose; the agent must infer based on the tool name and descriptions.

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