get_globalprotect_config

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description repeats this with '[READ-ONLY]'. It adds one useful behavioral detail—the exact config path—but does not disclose output shape, error cases, or effects of the optional firewall parameter.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the read-only flag and action. Both sentences add value: one states the resource, the other the source path.

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 low-complexity, one-optional-parameter read-only getter, the description plus schema and annotations are nearly sufficient. The only minor gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not describe the return shape, but the resource name and path make the expected output clear enough.

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 single optional parameter is fully documented in the schema with its own description, so the tool description does not need to add much. It adds no parameter-level information, but schema coverage is 100%, matching the baseline.

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 action ('Retrieves') and a specific resource ('GlobalProtect gateway and portal configuration'), and includes the config path. This is enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like get_globalprotect_users and gp_current_users.

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?

The description implies usage: call it when you need GlobalProtect gateway/portal configuration. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, leaving selection among the many get_* siblings to inference.

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