get_host_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful context about the returned data (specs, role, OS, services) but does not go beyond that into behavior like freshness or aggregation specifics. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate without being rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and return content. There is zero superfluous text, and every phrase adds value.

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?

Given the simple tool with one parameter, good annotations (readOnlyHint), and the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It states what the tool returns in broad terms, and the output schema fills in the detailed structure. No further information is needed for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a well-described parameter including examples. The tool description reinforces the parameter meaning by saying 'by name or IP', but does not add significant new semantics beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies since schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb 'Look up' and the resource 'host' by name or IP, and lists the specific return data (specs, role, OS, services). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_service_info and get_ip_info by focusing on the entire host.

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 clearly implies the use case: when you need host details via name or IP. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or situations where a sibling tool might be more appropriate, but the context is clear enough.

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