fastly_get_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'read-only' and 'Never stores secrets', which covers safety and side-effect concerns. It does not mention return format or error behavior, but for a simple get tool this is acceptable. The transparency is strong relative to the absence of annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The critical 'read-only' qualifier leads, and the entire purpose is conveyed efficiently. Every word adds value.

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 output schema, the description should ideally hint at what the tool returns. It does not describe the return value or failure modes, which could leave an agent uncertain about how to consume the result. However, the tool's simplicity mitigates this gap; the core action and scope are well defined. Still, a mention of response format would make it complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining that the key can be either tenant/user or tenant/account, implying the optional userId and accountId are alternatives. However, it does not clarify that they are mutually exclusive, nor does it explain the 'key' and 'tenantId' beyond their names. Partial compensation for the coverage gap.

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 a specific verb ('retrieve') and resource ('configuration key'), and clearly states the scope: tenant/user or tenant/account. It also distinguishes itself from the write sibling 'fastly_set_config' by being marked read-only. The mention of Postgres adds specificity.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state conditions, prerequisites, or mention that you should use 'fastly_set_config' for writes. The read-only hint makes its purpose clear, but the absence of any alternative routing or exclusion criteria leaves the agent to infer usage.

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