config_snapshot

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds real behavioral context: output is 'sanitised and bounded', and its content varies by proxy (caddy returns /config/, traefik returns merged /api/rawdata, haproxy returns a teaching note). This tells the agent what to expect from the payload, which the annotation alone does not.

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?

A [READ] tag front-loads the operation type, followed by two purposeful sentences and a compact Args block. The haproxy clause is slightly opaque but compact. No filler; every element earns its place.

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?

For a single-optional-param read tool with no output schema and no annotations beyond readOnlyHint, the description covers the return content, per-proxy variance, and the param. It stops short of defining exactly what 'bounded' limits or what is stripped by sanitisation, but is otherwise complete enough to invoke correctly.

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 0% (the schema only has a title and null default), so the description carries the burden and does so adequately: 'target: Proxy target name from config; omit for the default.' It explains both the parameter's meaning and the default behavior, though it doesn't enumerate valid target values.

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 names a specific resource and read action: the live config tree or merged dynamic state, with per-proxy source paths (caddy /config/, traefik /api/rawdata). It clearly distinguishes this snapshot tool from siblings like get_config_value or search_config, though the phrasing is noun-heavy ('The live config tree...') rather than verb-led.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative among the many config-related siblings (search_config, get_config_value, proxy_overview). The only contextual hint is the target arg semantics, which the agent must infer usage from. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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