Web server settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, informing the agent that this is a safe read operation. The description adds only the endpoint path, not the return structure or other behavioral details. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action 'Return', includes the endpoint, and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, read-only), the description is sufficient to allow correct invocation. However, with no output schema, a bit more detail about what the 'settings page' returns (e.g., HTML vs JSON) would enhance completeness, though it's not critical.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is an empty object. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't need to add parameter semantics beyond what the schema already shows.

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 'Return the Banana web server settings page (`/v2/settings`)' uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('web server settings page') with the exact endpoint. No sibling tool covers 'settings', so it is clearly distinguished.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Given the large sibling list, more context about usage would be valuable.

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