get-provider-details

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions a naming constraint, not side effects, read-only nature, error handling, or authentication needs. The 'detailed information' output is unspecified.

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 sentence with two clear instructions. It is concise and front-loaded, though it could briefly mention what 'detailed information' includes.

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 fails to explain the return structure or content of 'detailed information'. For a data retrieval tool, this is a significant gap.

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 coverage is 100% and already describes both parameters with examples. The description repeats the prefix rule without adding new meaning, so no extra value beyond the schema baseline.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information about an OpenTofu provider by namespace and name. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., get-datasource-docs, get-resource-docs) which target different entities.

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: use when you need provider details. The prefix rule provides guidance for the name parameter, but there is no explicit advice on when to choose this tool over siblings or any exclusions.

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