openstack_server_detail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get detailed info' only implies a read operation, but it does not state that it is safe/non-destructive, does not describe what details are included, or mention any error conditions or special constraints. Minimal added transparency beyond the core purpose.

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, complete sentence that gets straight to the point. No redundant words or filler. It is concise yet informative enough for the purpose.

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?

This is a simple 2-parameter read tool with no output schema, but the description does not explain what 'detailed info' actually includes, and the joint use of both device_id and server_id is not clarified (why are both needed?). The description is adequate for a basic get operation but leaves gaps about the response content and parameter relationship.

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%: both 'device_id' and 'server_id' are clearly defined in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning for the parameters, leaving them to the schema. This meets the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage.

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 specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'detailed info of a specific server/instance', and the scope 'in OpenStack'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like openstack_list_servers (lists servers) and openstack_server_action (performs actions), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 'Get detailed info of a specific server/instance' implies when to use it (when you need details for one server rather than a list). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the contrast with list_servers is clear. Missing explicit when-not-to-use guidance prevents a 5.

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