get_server_info

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

Without annotations, the description describes a read-only operation, which is correct. However, it fails to disclose potential behavioral aspects such as required permissions, rate limits, or whether the data is cached. The straightforward nature mitigates this somewhat.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's action and scope without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description provides adequate context about the tool's purpose and output fields. However, because there is no output schema, more detail on the return format would improve completeness.

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 input schema fully documents the parameter with 100% coverage, and the description adds context by indicating 'any managed instance' and listing the returned info fields. This adds meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 retrieves detailed server info including hostname, uptime, disk, and memory from any managed instance. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_server_memory which focus on specific metrics.

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 implies the tool is for general server info retrieval but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternative tools like get_server_memory or cloudwatch_get_log_events. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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