hmc_find_system

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds the exact-match behavior and the return contract (full system dict or None), helping the agent know what to expect for found and not-found cases. It does not discuss pagination or authentication, but for a simple read-only lookup this is sufficient.

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 two sentences, front-loads the action and resource, and avoids filler. The phrase '(exact match)' adds crucial specificity without verbosity.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup with an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, and return value normalization. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke correctly without further context.

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 defines only a required string 'name' with no description (0% coverage). The description clarifies that 'name' refers to the SystemName and must be exact, adding critical meaning beyond the schema's generic label.

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 uses the specific verb 'Find' with the resource 'managed system' and the exact matching criteria 'by its SystemName (exact match)'. This clearly distinguishes it from list tools like hmc_systems and summary tools like hmc_system_summary.

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 implies the tool is for when you have a specific SystemName and need the full system dict, as opposed to listing all systems. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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