Get service

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing that secrets are masked by default and that passing showSecrets reveals them. This is a meaningful behavioral trait that could affect the response and the agent's decision to set showSecrets. It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but given the read-only annotation and the tool's simplicity, this is sufficient.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, and immediately includes the critical behavioral note about secrets. Every word earns its place with no filler or repetition of schema details, making it highly concise 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?

For a simple two-parameter getter with readOnlyHint and no output schema, the description provides the core information needed to invoke the tool correctly: the identifier (UUID) and the one behavioral option (showSecrets). It does not detail the fields or shape of 'service details', but that is not necessary given the tool's straightforward nature. It also omits error cases, but the essential context is covered.

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 carries the burden of explaining parameters. It addresses both params: 'by UUID' clarifies that uuid is the identifier, and 'pass showSecrets to reveal' explains the boolean's effect and implies the default false. It does not specify UUID format or explicitly say showSecrets is optional, but the schema already defines types and requiredness, and the description conveys the essential semantics.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Get service details' and scopes it with 'by UUID', clearly distinguishing it from listServices (which lists all services) and from getters for other resources like getServer or getApplication. It also mentions the key parameter-based behavior (secrets masking), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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: it is for retrieving a single service when you know its UUID. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as listServices (to enumerate services) or serviceEnvs (for environment variables). There are no exclusions or explicit alternative recommendations, relying instead on the resource type and UUID scope to imply use.

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