Get Characteristic Configurations

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.). It adds value beyond annotations by explaining the purpose and usage of the configurations, though no additional behavioral traits are 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 three sentences: purpose, definition, and usage guidance. It is efficiently structured with no redundant information.

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 simple list tool, the description explains the concept, return type, and how to use the results. It omits the 'top' parameter but the schema covers it. Without output schema, describing return shape adds completeness.

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 description does not mention the 'top' parameter at all. With schema coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but fails to add meaning; the schema provides constraints but no semantic context.

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 lists characteristic configurations from SIA CharacteristicService, defining them as custom attributes for fields and crop zones. It uses a specific verb 'List' and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on configuration objects.

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 explicitly instructs to use configuration_ID values when creating field or crop zone characteristic values, providing actionable context. However, it does not include when to avoid this tool or compare with alternatives.

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