get_agent_info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation with no side effects. It lists returned fields but does not disclose behavioral traits like auth requirements or potential errors.

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 clear sections for Args and Returns. It is front-loaded with the purpose. Slightly redundant with the existing output schema, but still efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the purpose, parameter, and return format. Missing details like error handling are acceptable given simplicity.

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?

The schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful context for the agent_id parameter, including examples and the special case '000' for the manager, compensating for the missing schema documentation.

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 it retrieves detailed information about a specific OSSEC agent, using 'Get' as a verb and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_agents and get_alerts by focusing on a single agent's comprehensive details.

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 when detailed info about one agent is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool compared to siblings. No exclusion criteria or alternatives are provided.

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