config_config_list

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

Description indicates a read operation ('List') but fails to explain the required 'name' parameter's role or behavior (e.g., whether it refers to a config store or scope). No annotations provided, leaving the agent unsure about side effects or prerequisites.

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?

Very concise single-sentence description that front-loads the verb 'List'. It provides the category '[config]' and core functionality without excess. However, it could be slightly expanded to clarify parameters without losing conciseness.

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 complex config tool ecosystem and minimal description, the description is incomplete. It does not differentiate from config_config_list_stores, explain what 'name' refers to, or mention output format. Output schema exists but is not referenced.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so description must compensate. The mention of 'filtered by prefix' partially explains the optional prefix parameter, but the required 'name' parameter is entirely undefined. This omission leaves a critical gap.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all keys' with optional prefix filter. Tool name 'config_config_list' aligns well with its purpose, and it distinguishes from siblings like config_config_get (which retrieves a specific key) and config_config_set (which sets a key).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as config_config_get (for a specific key) or config_config_list_stores (to list stores). The description lacks when-not advice or context for selection.

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