get_sql_endpoint

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Return details' without mentioning error behavior, permissions, idempotency, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a safe agent invocation.

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?

Single sentence, 10 words, directly states purpose with no redundancy. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Tool has an output schema, so return details need not be described. However, the description misses constraints (e.g., workspace requirement, what if endpoint not found). Still, for a simple retrieval tool, it is mostly complete.

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 0%, but description adds minimal semantics by specifying endpoint identifier as 'name or GUID'. However, both parameters (workspace and endpoint) lack further explanation of format or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Return'), resource ('details for a single SQL analytics endpoint'), and identifier type ('name or GUID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_sql_endpoints (listing all) and get_sql_endpoint_permissions (permissions).

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 use when needing details for one endpoint, but no explicit when-not or alternatives (e.g., vs list_sql_endpoints). However, the clear purpose and sibling list provide enough context for selection.

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