get_network_loadbalancer

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

The description is consistent with the annotation readOnlyHint=true, indicating a read-only operation. It adds no extra behavioral context such as auth requirements, rate limits, or response format. The annotation already covers the key safety profile, so a score of 3 reflects the adequate but minimal extra info.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundancy or filler. It front-loads the action ('Get') and the target, making it immediately scannable.

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 get-by-ID tool, the description is adequately complete. It names the resource type and includes the NLB abbreviation. Combined with schema and annotations, an agent has enough to invoke it correctly. A small gap is not specifying what 'details' includes, but this is a minor omission for such a straightforward operation.

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%, with all three parameters (datacenter_id, network_loadbalancer_id, depth) described in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the exact resource, 'details of a specific network load balancer (NLB)'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_network_loadbalancers (which lists) and get_application_loadbalancer (which targets a different balancer type).

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?

Usage context is implied: to retrieve details of a single NLB when you have its ID and the data center ID. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like get_loadbalancer or get_application_loadbalancer, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing to list NLBs first.

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