Argocd Get Application

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned-field inventory and the refresh=hard reconciliation behavior, but the latter is already spelled out in the refresh parameter's schema description, so net new behavioral disclosure is modest.

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?

Two tight sentences with the return contents front-loaded and the refresh nuance second. No filler, though the second sentence is partly redundant with the schema.

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?

A read-only single-resource getter with full schema coverage and an output schema, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary. The description is adequate; only routing guidance against overlapping siblings is absent.

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 100%, so every parameter is documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description's refresh=hard sentence largely restates the refresh enum's own description rather than adding new syntax or defaults.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one application') and enumerates what is returned (spec, sync/health, conditions, operation, summary, resource counts). The 'one' scopes it against the many-apps sibling argocd_list_applications, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. It does not tell the agent when to prefer this over argocd_list_applications, argocd_get_managed_resources, argocd_get_manifests, or argocd_get_resource_tree, all of which surface overlapping application data.

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