bourne_site_inspect

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

Annotations clearly mark the operation as read-only and idempotent, so the description does not need to disclose safety traits. The description adds useful context about the inspected entities (policy claims, inventory identities) but does not reveal behaviors such as error handling, result shape specifics, or any authoritative constraints that go beyond the 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?

A single, tight sentence that captures the essential purpose. It is front-loaded, easy to parse, and contains no extraneous details.

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?

The description adequately summarizes the tool's behavior given the single parameter and read-only annotations. An output schema exists, so omitting return details is acceptable; the only notable absence is explicit routing guidance among the many sibling site tools.

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%, with an explicit description for 'reference': 'Exact configured site name or canonical site ID.' The tool description does not add details on how that reference is resolved or provide examples, so the value matches the schema baseline rather than exceeding it.

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 states a specific action and object: 'Inspect one configured site' plus what will be inspected, 'policy claims, and inventory identities.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like bourne_site_list or bourne_site_discover, although it doesn't explicitly name the alternatives.

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 purpose statement implies when to use this tool: to inspect a single configured site by reference. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over related tools such as bourne_site_discover or bourne_site_policy_claim, leaving the choices up to the model.

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