Get OrangePro agent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read-only operation. The description adds that it returns 'agent config, run history, and current status,' which is helpful but does not go beyond what annotations guarantee. No contradictions 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?

The description is two sentences long, each serving a distinct purpose: first sentence defines the function, second sentence gives usage guidance and return summary. No filler words, front-loaded with the key action.

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 that there is no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns ('agent config, run history, and current status'). The tool is a single-agent getter, and the sibling tools cover more specialized queries, so this description is complete enough for its role.

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 agent_id and tenant_id described. The description adds value by clarifying that agent_id comes 'from orangepro_list_agents' and that tenant_id 'Defaults to ORANGEPRO_TENANT_ID env var,' which is useful context beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Get full detail, configuration, timeline, and recent runs for a specific OrangePro agent.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and a well-defined resource ('OrangePro agent'), and differentiates itself from sibling tools like orangepro_list_agents by focusing on inspecting a single agent in depth.

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 explicitly says 'Use after orangepro_list_agents to inspect a particular agent.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the sibling tools (e.g., orangepro_get_agent_health, orangepro_get_agent_logs) suggest specialized uses, and the description implies this is a general inspection tool.

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