get_sdwan_config_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the basic read operation but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what the response format contains, or any potential side effects. The absence of any behavioral context beyond 'get status' is a notable gap.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action, and the second provides critical parameter sourcing. This is an exemplary model of 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?

For a single-parameter simple status-check operation, the description covers the essential input and its provenance. The presence of an output schema (even if not detailed here) reduces the need to explain return values. However, it could benefit from a brief note on the relationship to get_sdwan_config or the exact status semantics.

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 description explicitly states config_id is REQUIRED and instructs the agent to obtain it from list_sdwan_configs, adding meaningful semantics beyond the schema's bare string type. Although schema coverage is 0%, this direct guidance effectively compensates for the missing parameter documentation.

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 tool gets the status of an SD-WAN configuration by ID, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling get_sdwan_config, which may retrieve configuration details, leaving some ambiguity about the exact distinction.

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 provides guidance on where to obtain config_id (from list_sdwan_configs), which is useful for usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus get_sdwan_config or other related tools, leaving the selection context implicit.

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