config_inspect

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds valuable context: swarm manager requirement, post-creation readability, and base64 encoding of Spec.Data. No contradictions.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. Every subsequent sentence adds essential context: preconditions, comparison to secrets, usage guidance, and return format. 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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers prerequisites, usage, return value structure, and behavioral nuance. Fully sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries full weight. It defines id_or_name as accepting 'id or name' and documents the return dict's structure (ID, CreatedAt, UpdatedAt, Spec fields). Adds clear meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Get a swarm config's full inspect payload by id or name', which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It also distinguishes from config_list by noting 'use this to read one config's contents and metadata'.

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?

Explicitly says 'Requires a swarm manager' and contrasts with secrets: 'Unlike a secret, a config's payload IS readable after creation'. It also directs users to config_list for enumeration, providing clear when-to-use vs alternatives.

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