Searxng Get Settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond them: the precedence rule for which file is read, that the path is returned alongside the content, and the external-SEARXNG_URL caveat. The return shape is left to the existing output schema.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that leads with the action and resource, with no wasted framing. Minor clutter from the inline 'CONCEPT:SR-KG.compute.embedded-instance' tag, which adds nothing for an agent deciding how to call the tool.

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?

No parameters, an output schema covering the return value, and the description supplies the resolution logic and the external-URL caveat. Complete enough to call correctly; the only residual gap is that it does not explicitly point to searxng_set_settings as the modification counterpart.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there are no parameters whose semantics need explaining.

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?

States a specific verb (read) and resource (the embedded SearXNG instance's active settings.yml), and spells out the resolution order (user override at $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/searxng-mcp/settings.yml, else packaged default) plus the returned path. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings searxng_set_settings and searxng_reset_settings.

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 clause 'Informational only when an external SEARXNG_URL is configured' tells the agent when the result is not meaningful, which is real routing guidance. It does not explicitly name the alternative (searxng_set_settings) for modification, so it stops short of full when/when-not/alternative framing.

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