aras_get_effectivity_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It only describes the data contents (config details) but does not state that the operation is read-only, requires permissions, or has any side effects. The name implies a getter, but this is not explicitly disclosed.

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, concise sentence that efficiently lists the key aspects of the configuration. It avoids unnecessary words and is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 getter with no output schema, the description provides a reasonable list of what the configuration includes. It does not describe the response format, but this is not required given the absence of an output schema. The main aspects are covered.

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 input schema is empty, so there are no parameters to describe. The schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no parameter-related details. Thus, the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 identifies the resource (effectivity configuration) and lists the specific data it provides: scope, variables, defined product models, and expression counts on BOM lines. It is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on other Aras entities.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It is a getter, but there is no guidance on conditions or comparisons with other tools, such as when to use aras_get_effectivity_model or similar.

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