lc_get_cloud_adapter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Fetch', implying a read operation, but does not mention idempotency, authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential errors. Insufficient disclosure for a tool with no annotation support.

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), but it sacrifices content. It is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It fails to earn its place by omitting critical details that could fit in the same space.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description should cover parameter roles, return value, and behavior. It does none of these. It is incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 the parameters 'oid' and 'name'. It adds no meaning beyond the parameter names from the schema. The agent is left to infer their purpose, which is inadequate.

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 'Fetch one cloud adapter Hive record' clearly states the action (Fetch) and resource (cloud adapter Hive record). It distinguishes from sibling tools like lc_list_cloud_adapters (list all) and lc_set_cloud_adapter (create/update) by implying single record retrieval. However, it does not elaborate on what constitutes a cloud adapter or the meaning of 'Hive record', which is slightly vague.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lc_list_cloud_adapters or lc_preview_set_cloud_adapter. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The description lacks any usage direction.

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