get_provider_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds context about the nature of retrieved data ('capabilities and configuration status'), which informs the agent of the return content without repeating annotation fields.

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?

A single sentence with a clear verb and object. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant words, earning maximum conciseness.

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 with one parameter and an output schema exists, but the parameter semantics are undefined and no usage alternatives are mentioned. The description is adequate for a basic read-only lookup but leaves gaps in parameter guidance.

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 0%, and the description does not explain what the 'provider' parameter should contain (e.g., ID, name, or slug). It only references 'single provider', leaving the agent to guess the expected value 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 states the tool fetches capabilities and configuration status for a single provider. The verb 'Get' and the resource are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like list_providers by scoping to one provider.

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 implies usage for inspecting a specific provider, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as list_providers. There is no mention of when to prefer this over other tools, so it provides only implicit guidance.

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