protect_get_alarm_hub

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: returns specific fields, warns that additional fields are unverified, and mentions the API version (7.1.60). No contradiction.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key return fields. No extraneous information.

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?

Given one parameter, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete: it states what it returns, warns about limitations, and provides version info. No gaps.

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% (parameter id with description 'Alarm hub ID'). The tool description does not add further meaning beyond 'by ID' in the main sentence. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific alarm hub by ID'. It lists key return fields and distinguishes from sibling tools like protect_list_alarm_hubs.

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 description implies usage for fetching full details of a specific hub, but it lacks explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives. Sibling tool names (e.g., protect_list_alarm_hubs) provide context, but no direct comparison.

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