get_egg

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read access with open-world semantics. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies this is an 'admin action' (permission level), details the return content structure, and mentions API key requirement. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with core purpose, followed by return details and usage prerequisites. Every sentence adds value: first defines the action, second specifies return content, third provides parameter sourcing guidance, fourth states authentication requirement. No wasted words.

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 read-only tool with good annotations and 100% schema coverage, the description provides excellent context about return content, admin requirements, and parameter sourcing. The main gap is lack of output schema, but the description compensates well by detailing the return structure. Could slightly improve by mentioning error cases or rate limits.

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%, with both parameters well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal semantic context by referencing list_nests and list_eggs as sources for the IDs, but doesn't provide additional format or validation details beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 specific action ('Get full details'), resource ('egg/server template'), and scope ('admin action'). It distinguishes from siblings like list_eggs (which lists IDs) and get_nest (different resource type) by specifying detailed retrieval of a specific egg.

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 when-to-use guidance: 'Use list_nests to find the nest_id and list_eggs to find the egg_id.' It also specifies prerequisites ('Requires Application API key') and distinguishes from list_eggs by indicating this is for detailed retrieval after identification.

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