Gsettings Get

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral weight; it does signal a non-mutating read, which is the key safety property here. It says nothing about failure behavior for unknown schemas or keys, but for a simple read that gap is modest.

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 front-loaded sentence with an illustrative example and no filler. It is arguably terse rather than wasteful, and the example earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the example supplies the essential parameter meaning for a two-parameter read. Remaining gaps are edge cases (missing schema, invalid key) rather than things needed to call it correctly.

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 schema alone is bare types with no meaning. The example does real work by showing that `schema` is a dotted schema id and `key` is a key name within it, but it never states formats, valid characters, or whether nested/relocatable schemas are supported.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read a gsettings value") and immediately grounds it in a concrete example. The read semantics also implicitly separate it from gsettings_set and gsettings_reset, though no sibling is named.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to alternatives such as gsettings_list_keys or gsettings_describe for discovery. The agent must infer that this tool is for fetching a single known key's value.

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