jumpcloud_config_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It declares 'Read-only' and 'Risk: low,' which signals non-mutating behavior. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, or how optional parameters affect behavior, leaving some behavioral traits undefined.

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 four short sentences with the core action front-loaded. Every sentence contributes value: read-only status, use case, secret warning, and risk level. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only list with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys purpose and risk. However, it omits how the optional parameters affect results and what a successful response looks like, which is a noticeable gap for an agent deciding how to invoke the tool.

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 input schema has three parameters (prefix, userId, tenantId) with zero descriptions, and the description only vaguely says 'app/user scoped.' It never explains what each parameter does or how it filters the listing, so the description fails to add meaningful parameter semantics.

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 opens with 'Read-only Postgres config listing' and 'Use to enumerate app/user scoped non-secret configuration values,' clearly identifying a list/enumerate action on config. This explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like config_get, 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?

The phrase 'Use to enumerate app/user scoped non-secret configuration values' provides a clear use case, and 'Do not store secrets in config' gives an important advisory. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context makes it evident that this is for listing rather than single get/set/delete.

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