autoscale_config_get

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

The description indicates it is a read operation via '[READ]', which implies no side effects, but does not detail permissions, error conditions, or the exact response format. With no annotations, some behavioral aspects are missing.

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 concise with two sentences and a list of arguments. It is front-loaded with the purpose and wastes no 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?

While the description covers the tool's purpose and parameters, it does not describe the output format or potential errors. Since there is no output schema, this leaves the agent guessing about the return structure.

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 description explains each parameter: application, deployment, and target, adding meaning beyond the bare schema property names. However, it could include more details like acceptable values or constraints.

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 reads autoscale bounds (min/max replicas, target ongoing requests). It uses the verb 'read' and specifies the resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like autoscale_config_update or scaling tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as autoscale_config_update or scaling tools. The description lacks context for selection.

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