iaas_get_integration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond re-quoting the HTTP verb and path — no error behavior, no note on what an integration represents, no indication of response shape.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but two of three lines are redundant restatements of the tool name and the REST path. The endpoint line is the only piece of genuinely distinct information, and it isn't something an agent can act on.

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 single-resource GET with full annotation coverage and a fully documented schema, this is minimally adequate. It remains silent on what an integration is in this platform and on the sibling list/update tools, which are the realistic confusion points.

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 100%, with `id`, `select` and `apiVersion` all documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only echoes "with a given id" and adds no meaning about `select` or the date-formatted `apiVersion`.

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 is essentially a restatement of the tool name ("Get an integration" twice) plus the raw REST path. It states the resource is fetched by id, but offers no differentiation from the sibling list tool `iaas_get_integrations`, which is the main ambiguity an agent faces here.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this single-item getter versus `iaas_get_integrations` or `iaas_update_integration_async`. No prerequisites, no mention of required permissions or that an unknown id yields an error.

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