infomaniak_get_public_cloud_database_service

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the word 'Read,' such as what data is returned or any error behavior. It does not contradict the annotations, but it provides no extra 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 extremely concise, consisting of one short sentence with no fluff. However, it is under-specified, missing useful context that could fit without verbosity. It earns a 4 for efficiency but loses a point for omitting meaningful content.

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 read operation with 3 integer parameters and an output schema, the description could be adequate if it clarified the parameter hierarchy. It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about resource nesting. The output schema may cover return values, but parameter context is entirely absent.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters. It does not mention public_cloud_id, project_id, or dbaas_id at all, nor their hierarchical relationships. The agent is left to infer from names, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 the specific verb "Read" and clearly names the resource "one Public Cloud DBaaS service." It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_public_cloud_database_services (which lists multiple) and manage_public_cloud_database_service (which modifies), so the purpose is 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the list or manage alternatives. It simply states the action without explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the tool's name, which is insufficient.

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