get_ranger_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It says 'Get' indicating a read operation, but omits details such as authentication requirements, behavior on missing policy (error or null), or any side effects.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words, delivering the essential information efficiently.

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 the tool has 3 optional parameters and an output schema, the description explains the two lookup modes adequately. However, it lacks information on edge cases (e.g., not found behavior) and does not leverage the output schema to describe the return value shape.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that you can use either policy_id or service_name+policy_name, but it does not clarify that these are alternatives, not combined, nor does it specify that both service_name and policy_name are required when using the name-based lookup.

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 action 'Get' and the resource 'policy', and specifies two distinct lookup methods: by ID alone or by service_name + policy_name. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_ranger_policies and search_ranger_policies.

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 when to use this tool: when you have either a policy ID or a service name plus policy name. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternative tools (e.g., for listing or searching) or mention prerequisites.

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