get_global_settings

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). The description adds behavioral context by specifying that it retrieves a singleton and listing example fields, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and provides illustrative examples in the second sentence. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 no parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is fully complete. It clearly states the purpose and gives representative examples of the output contents.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters; the baseline is 4 for no-parameter tools.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource as 'platform-wide global configuration singleton'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which retrieve specific entities like devices or participants.

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 implicitly defines usage context by listing example contents (e.g., default themes, bandwidth caps), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. The differentiation is clear from sibling names, but explicit guidance is missing.

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