Service status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'get details' aligns with a read operation. It adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but does not contradict them.

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 sentence with no wasted words. While concise, it could be slightly expanded to clarify parameters without losing efficiency.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and 0% parameter documentation, the description fails to convey what 'details' are returned or how to correctly specify parameters. It is incomplete for a tool with two required parameters.

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%, and the description does not explain the meaning of 'host' or 'unit' parameters. The agent must infer their roles, which may lead to incorrect usage.

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 'Get details on a systemd unit' uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('systemd unit'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_cpu_info, get_disk_info, and get_processes which target different system resources.

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 when to use (when you need details on a systemd unit) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives among sibling tools. It lacks comparative context.

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