get_instance

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

The description indicates a read-only operation ('get information'), which is a useful behavioral trait given there are no annotations. However, it does not disclose potential error cases (e.g., invalid ID), authentication requirements, or return shape beyond the implicit read nature. For a simple get, this is adequate but not thorough.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('get information') and the key qualifier ('by ID'). Every word contributes to the meaning, making it well-structured for quick parsing.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. An agent knows the operation is a fetch by ID and can correctly invoke it using the schema. Minor gaps like response content or error behavior are not critical for making the call, so a 4 is appropriate.

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%: the only parameter instance_id is described as 'ID виртуальной машины'. The description repeats this same information ('по ID') without adding format, validation, or usage details. Baseline 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter fully.

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 a clear verb and resource: 'Get information about a virtual machine by ID.' It is distinct from sibling tools like list_instances or start_instance, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from them. The 'by ID' scope helps, but lacks a direct contrast with alternatives.

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 about when to use this tool instead of list_instances, get_operation, or other siblings. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria. The description only states what the tool does, not when to select it.

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