get-network-volume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns specific fields (name, size, data center), which provides some behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it does not cover potential edge cases or authentication requirements.

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?

Extremely concise: a single sentence that front-loads the key information (action, resource, method, key fields). No extraneous words.

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 single-parameter read tool with high annotation coverage, the description is largely sufficient. It mentions the returned fields, which is helpful. However, it could optionally note the read-only nature (already covered by annotations) or any data center 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the sole parameter. The description ('by id') adds no new meaning beyond the schema's 'ID of the network volume to retrieve', so baseline 3 applies.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('one network volume'), and the method ('by id'). It also lists the returned fields (name, size, data center), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-network-volumes.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies use when you have the network volume ID, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like list-network-volumes.

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