get_tier1_gateway

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses return format (single dict not list envelope), the exact fields returned, and what is deliberately omitted. It also explains the update workflow dependency, providing meaningful behavioral context an agent cannot derive from annotations alone.

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 compact and well-structured: a READ marker, a one-line purpose, usage ordering, return details, and a pointer to a sibling tool. Every sentence earns its place and no unnecessary filler is present.

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 simple two-parameter, no-output-schema tool with rich annotations, the description covers purpose, ordering, return shape, included fields, and exclusions. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 the schema fully documents both target and tier1_id. The description reiterates that tier1_id comes from list_tier1_gateways, which the schema already says, so it adds little semantic value beyond the structured definition.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Get detailed info for one Tier-1 gateway.' It distinguishes itself from list_tier1_gateways by specifying a single detail dict rather than the list envelope, and from list_segments by noting attached segments are not included. The purpose is unambiguous and differentiates from siblings.

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?

Explicitly provides a usage sequence: use after list_tier1_gateways and always before update_tier1_gateway, with the rationale that update is a PATCH requiring current values. It also names list_segments for attached segments, giving clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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