get_decryption_profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with a READ-ONLY tag. It adds the config path '/config/.../profiles/decryption', which is useful context about the data source, but it does not describe return format, potential absence of profiles, or any other behavioral details.

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 extremely concise: one sentence with the READ-ONLY hint front-loaded and the config path included. Every element earns its place with no redundant wording.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and clear annotations, the purpose and config source are adequately stated. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the returned decryption profiles contain or how to interpret the result, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 100%, so the single optional 'firewall' parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves SSL decryption profiles.' It also adds a concrete config path, which makes the target resource unambiguous. The name and description together clearly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_decryption_rules and get_security_profiles.

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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_decryption_rules or get_security_profiles. The description only states what the tool does; it does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or a decision context.

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