get_topologysource

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to state safety. However, the description does not disclose any additional behavior such as the return format, whether the TopologySource is a complex object, or any dependent data. It adds nothing beyond the annotations.

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 one concise sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 tool that returns details (likely a rich object), the description is insufficient. There is no output schema, no explanation of what 'details' include, nor any reference to related resources. An agent may not know what to expect in the response, which is a significant gap given the lack of output schema.

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 fully describes the 'topologysource_id' parameter (100% coverage), so the description need not provide additional detail. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema is sufficient.

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 the tool retrieves details about a specific TopologySource, which is clear, but it does not distinguish it from the sibling tool 'get_topologysources' (plural) which likely lists all. The use of 'details' is generic.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_topologysources' or how it relates to other topology-related tools. The context implies it is for retrieving a single item by ID, but this is not explicitly stated.

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