sylve_jail_show

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is fully covered. The description adds that output includes 'live guest info', telling the agent it returns runtime state in addition to static config, but says nothing about response size, node-scoped vs cluster-wide aggregation, or failure modes when a jail is missing.

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 that covers the verb, resource, and returned content. Nothing wasted and nothing buried.

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?

With no output schema, the description does its job by naming what is returned (configuration plus live guest info), and params are fully covered by the schema and annotations. It could be slightly more complete by hinting at how the node/context scoping affects the result set.

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 all three parameters (jail, node, context) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further meaning about identifier formats or how node/context interact with the jail lookup, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource (show a jail) plus exactly what comes back: full configuration and live guest info. It distinguishes itself from sylve_jail_list by implying detail rather than enumeration, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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 phrase 'full configuration' implies this is the detail view to use after listing, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement or mention of sylve_jail_list / sylve_jail_logs as alternatives. Usage is only inferable from context.

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