fly_get_app

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of what 'details' includes, whether the app must exist, or error behavior on unknown app names.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is arguably a symptom of thin content rather than disciplined conciseness.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should describe what the returned 'details' contain (status, org, network config, etc.). It also says nothing about required auth or error behavior, leaving a read tool with an open world hint underspecified.

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 50%: app_name is documented in the schema, but api_key is undocumented in both places. The description mentions only 'a specific Fly.io app', which merely restates the app_name parameter and does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a concrete verb ('Get') and resource ('details for a specific Fly.io app'), which clearly separates it from fly_list_apps and fly_list_machines. It does not name a sibling explicitly, but the singular 'specific app' versus the list siblings makes purpose clear.

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 is only implied: the agent must infer that fly_list_apps should be used first to discover an app name, then this tool to fetch that app. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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