config_backup

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

Exhaustively documents redaction scope (password hashes, SNMP keys, etc.), pattern-based detection, and the 'redaction' block in output. Discloses that it reduces rather than eliminates exposure, meeting transparency needs without 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?

Starts with a summary tag and structured explanation. Some redundancy exists (repeats redaction details), but remains readable and well-organized.

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?

Covers output content (redaction block, untouched lines), edge cases (PKI keys), and trade-offs of include_secrets. Lacks mention of error states or rate limits, but sufficient for a simple read tool.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: include_secrets warns about storing secrets, and target specifies the device. Adds clear usage 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 opens with '[READ] Return the device running config' and details the redaction behavior. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like config_diff and config_replace by focusing on retrieval.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to use the CLI's '-o' flag instead of include_secrets for human readability. Also notes the redaction limitation regarding multi-line PKI keys, implying when not to rely on it fully.

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