Get support bundle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It conveys a read-only 'Get' operation on a single identified resource, but it does not describe the response format, potential errors, or whether a file/artifact is returned. The docs link provides some added context.

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, front-loaded sentence followed by a relevant documentation link. There is no filler or repetition; every element earns its place.

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 one-parameter read tool, this is close to sufficient: it names the target, the identifying input, and links to Longhorn docs. However, there is no output schema and no explicit statement about what the caller should expect in return, so it is adequate but not fully self-contained.

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%, so the description must clarify the sole parameter. It does establish that 'id' selects a specific support bundle, which adds meaning beyond the bare 'string' type, but it does not explain the id format or where to find it.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('support bundle'), and scope ('single' by 'id'). The word 'single' distinguishes it from the sibling supportbundle_list tool without ambiguity.

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 clearly indicates that the tool is used when you have a support bundle id and want exactly one result. It does not explicitly mention listing first or when not to use it, but the selection criterion is unambiguous.

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