npm_get_dead_host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only says it retrieves details. It does not disclose behavior on a missing/invalid ID (error vs empty), whether the call is read-only and safe, or any permission requirements. For a 2-param tool with zero annotation coverage this is thin.

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 of nine words with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though it is so terse that it omits any behavioral context an agent would need.

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?

For a simple read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: the what is clear, but how it behaves on failure and what the 'expand' parameter buys are left unexplained. It covers the basics without the extra context a zero-annotation tool could benefit from.

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% (host_id documented as the dead host ID, expand as comma-separated objects), so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline 3 when the 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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (dead host) with the lookup key (by ID), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not, however, differentiate itself from sibling readers like npm_list_dead_hosts or the other npm_get_* tools beyond the resource noun.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus npm_list_dead_hosts (to enumerate) or npm_update_dead_host (to modify). Usage is only implied by the word 'Get' and the 'by ID' lookup, with no conditions, exclusions, or named alternatives.

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