ecp_storage_bd_get_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a read operation (get), that it returns only the client_id, and that the secret is never returned—a critical behavioral guarantee. This is meaningful context beyond what the empty schema provides.

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 single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the critical caveat about the secret. Every word earns its place; no fluff.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what it will get (client_id) and what it won't (secret). The only minor gap is not describing the exact response format, but that's acceptable given the simplicity.

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, so there is no parameter semantics burden. The description correctly implies no input is needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds clarity about what the tool returns.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the account's storage.bd backup config, specifies it returns only the client_id, and explicitly notes the secret is never returned. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like ecp_storage_bd_set_config and ecp_storage_bd_job_status.

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 this is a read-only configuration retrieval tool, and the explicit note about the secret not being returned provides important context for when to use it (e.g., when you need the client_id but should not expect the secret). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling set makes the distinction clear enough.

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