Get Host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Detalhes' implies a read operation and mentioning hosted roles/health checks hints at the returned content, but it does not state whether the call is read-only, what happens for an unknown host_id, or whether any permissions are needed.

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 short sentence with the key noun front-loaded and no padding. It is efficient, though the parenthetical about hostId is slightly awkward where a fuller parameter note would have been more useful.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and for a one-parameter getter the description is adequate at a minimum-viable level. It still lacks the operational context (how to obtain a host_id, behavior on failure) that an agent needs to invoke it correctly on the first try.

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 single host_id parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description only says it 'aceita hostId', which restates the parameter name without adding format, source, or validity constraints, so it barely compensates for the coverage gap.

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+resource ('Detalhes de um host') and names what the result contains (hosted roles and health checks), which distinguishes it from list_hosts and get_role_log. It is written in Portuguese while most sibling names/descriptions are English, a minor inconsistency, but the intent is 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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It never says to call list_hosts first to discover a host_id, nor when to prefer cluster_health_summary or list_roles for the same information. The only routing hint is implicit in the word 'Detalhes'.

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