Get server

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context—no mention of return format, error handling, or what happens if the UUID is not found. It effectively restates the tool's purpose without enriching behavioral transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It directly states the action and parameter, achieving 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, but there is no output schema or description of what 'details' are returned. Given the many sibling tools, the description could clarify that this returns general server info (not resources or domains) or that it returns the full server object. It is minimally adequate but leaves some ambiguity about the return value.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate. The phrase 'by UUID' clarifies the parameter's role as the server identifier, giving meaning beyond the bare schema definition. For a single string parameter, this is adequate, though it could be more explicit about the UUID format or source.

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 'Get server details by UUID' clearly identifies the action (get), the resource (server), and the scope (by UUID). It distinguishes this from listServers (which lists all servers) and more specific getters like getServerResources or getServerDomains.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for a single server's full details, nor does it recommend using listServers for enumeration or getServerResources for resource usage.

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