pools_getRetrieve a machine pool's details by providing its organization ID and pool ID. Use it to inspect or manage a specific Omnara machine pool.
Get machine pool
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| orgID | Yes | ||
| poolID | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of scope, error behavior (e.g. what happens for an unknown poolID), or return shape.
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?
Three words carry no waste but also earn nothing — the single sentence is under-specification rather than effective conciseness, contributing no information an agent can act on.
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, two fully undocumented parameters, and a description that merely echoes the title, an agent has nothing beyond the annotations to confirm correct invocation. The definition is inadequate for even a simple lookup tool.
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 0% and the description supplies no parameter meaning at all. The patterns encode format but not semantics, so both orgID and poolID remain unexplained in description and schema alike.
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?
Tautological: description restates name/title.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus pools_list or grant_pools_get, and no stated prerequisites. The only implied usage is that it fetches a single pool by ID, which an agent must infer from the required orgID/poolID parameters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.