Retrieve documented parameters, request body schema and example, access level, and description for a single vManage API operation to plan correct API calls.
Show the documented parameters, request body schema/example, access level and description for one vManage API operation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| operation_id | Yes | operationId from search_api_operations |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description does the work: 'Show' signals a non-mutating lookup, and it explicitly enumerates what information is returned (params, body schema/example, access level, description), which is a solid disclosure for a read-only introspection tool. It omits any mention of authentication or that the API spec must already be loaded, a minor 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?
A single front-loaded sentence with the resource and returned fields packed in; no filler, nothing repeated.
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 read tool with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned content, compensating for the missing output schema. The only shortfall is the absence of workflow guidance tying it to search_api_operations and call_api_operation.
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% and the single parameter's description already explains that operation_id comes from search_api_operations. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 ('Show') and enumerates the resource content it returns (parameters, request body schema/example, access level, description) scoped to 'one vManage API operation'. This is clearly distinguishable from search_api_operations and call_api_operation by the word 'documented' and the singular scope, though it never names those siblings 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?
The description body gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives. The usage chain is only implied: the schema's operation_id description ('operationId from search_api_operations') suggests searching first, and 'Show documented parameters' implies inspecting before call_api_operation, but the agent must infer this.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.