list_configs

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

Despite no annotations, the description indicates a read-only operation ('list') and mentions the source (Postgres) and optional filtering by key prefix. It does not detail pagination or limits, but this is a minor gap for a simple list tool.

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?

A single sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the verb and resource, delivering the core purpose efficiently without extraneous information.

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 the simple interface (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior: listing configs from Postgres with optional prefix filtering. It does not mention return structure or pagination, but the tool's simplicity keeps it adequate.

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 description adds context that the optional prefix filters by 'key prefix', which the schema lacks. However, it does not specify format, case sensitivity, or behavior when omitted, leaving minor ambiguity.

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 the action ('list') and resource ('configuration records'), and distinguishes from siblings like list_secrets by specifying the data source (Postgres) and the optional filtering by key prefix.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_config or list_secrets, though the name and description imply its use for multiple configs.

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