iaas_get_network_profile

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description contributes nothing beyond that — it does not mention that the call requires a valid, pre-existing profile id or what happens on a missing id (404), which would be genuinely additive context.

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 very short, but the first two lines say the same thing and the third line is the raw endpoint path, which duplicates the annotation title exactly. There is no wasted length, but there is wasted redundancy.

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, safe, idempotent single GET with full parameter documentation and rich annotations, this is minimally sufficient to invoke correctly. Still missing: what a network profile is and that no output schema exists to describe the returned object, leaving the agent to discover the response shape by calling.

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 100%: the schema documents 'id' as the network profile path id and 'apiVersion' with a format and reference URL. The description only echoes 'given id' and the URL template, adding no semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 the verb (get) and resource (network profile) and adds the scoping detail 'with a given id', which clarifies it is a single-resource retrieval. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling iaas_get_network_profiles (list) or iaas_get_network_profile-less alternatives, and the third line merely restates the HTTP path. The purpose is clear but not differentiated.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus the plural list variant or any other get-by-id sibling, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. The agent must infer from the tool name alone that 'id' must be known in advance.

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