prometheus_config_status

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint; the description adds meaningful behavioral context by asserting the tool returns a fingerprint and size and never the raw YAML or secrets, which tells the agent what it will and won't receive. It still omits auth requirements and how the fingerprint is computed.

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?

Two compact lines with the read-only marker and the secrecy guarantee front-loaded; every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

With no output schema and one optional param, the description covers the essentials: what is returned (fingerprint + size), what is withheld (YAML/secrets), and what the param means. Missing only when to reach for it relative to reload_prometheus_config.

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 0% and the single property has no description, so the description carries the burden. It does explain that 'target' is a Prometheus target name from config and that omitting it selects the default, which is genuinely useful given the null default.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ([READ] config status) and pins down the payload precisely: a running-config fingerprint plus size. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the mutation sibling reload_prometheus_config by flagging [READ], though it never names it.

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?

Gives only argument guidance ('omit for the default'), not when to call this versus reload_prometheus_config or prometheus_tsdb_status. No conditions, prerequisites, or alternative routing are stated.

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