get_system_resources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb 'Show' implies a read-only operation and the Returns section lists the monitored metrics, but it does not disclose permission requirements, whether vdom scope changes the result, or how current values are sampled.

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 definition is short and front-loads its purpose in the first sentence. The Parameters section largely duplicates schema fields, but the overall structure remains efficient and easy to scan.

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?

The description lists inputs and return categories, which is useful because there is no output schema. Still, with no annotations it leaves gaps around safe operation, prerequisites, and differentiation from other monitoring tools.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description repeats that device_id identifies the device and vdom is optional, but adds no extra meaning such as expected identifier format or the effect of omitting vdom.

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 specific verb and resource: showing current CPU, memory, disk, and session usage for a FortiGate device. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby monitoring siblings such as get_performance_status or get_device_status.

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 implied by the phrase 'Show current... usage,' suggesting on-demand resource monitoring. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over get_performance_status, get_device_status, or other status-related siblings.

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