jumpcloud_config_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and 'Risk: low', which are useful safety indicators. It does not cover return format, error behavior, or authentication, but the core behavioral trait is 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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no fluff. Every phrase adds value: 'Read-only', 'Postgres config getter', 'Use to fetch one user-scoped configuration key', and 'Risk: low'.

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?

This is a simple read-only tool with a minimal schema (one required param, no output schema). The description covers purpose, usage, and risk sufficiently for an agent to select and invoke it. It could improve by mentioning what is returned or what happens if the key is missing, but given the low complexity, it is nearly 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 only mentions 'config key' (mapping to 'key') and 'user-scoped' (hinting at userId/tenantId), but does not explain the meaning or format of any parameter, especially the optional userId and tenantId.

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 ('fetch') and resource ('Postgres config key'), and clarifies it is user-scoped. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like config_list, config_set, and config_delete.

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?

It states when to use it ('fetch one user-scoped configuration key'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, such as using config_list for multiple keys or config_set for writing.

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