iaas_get_machine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no behavior on unknown ids (error vs empty), no note about the openWorldHint exposure, no mention of what the response contains.

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, but the first line ('Get machine') is pure redundancy with the second and with the tool name. The one useful piece, the id-based scoping and endpoint path, is buried behind a duplicate.

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-only single-resource get with a fully documented schema and complete annotations, the essentials are present. With no output schema, however, the description gives no hint about the returned machine object, so an agent knows how to call it but not what to expect back.

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%, so the schema already documents id (path), select, and apiVersion. The description mentions 'given id' but adds no format, defaults, or guidance on the optional select/apiVersion parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a retrieval verb and resource plus the HTTP path, but 'Get machine with a given id' largely restates the tool name. It never distinguishes this single-machine lookup from the sibling list tool iaas_get_machines or from related getters such as iaas_get_machine_disks.

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 versus iaas_get_machines (list) or the machine sub-resource getters. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.

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