Server Config

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description adds value beyond annotations by explicitly stating it does NOT reveal auth tokens, which is a valuable disclosure that prevents an agent from expecting sensitive data in the output. This privacy caveat is contextual and useful.

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 concise sentence that fully covers what the tool does and adds a key caveat (no auth tokens). Zero wasted words, front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to explain return values. The tool has no parameters, is a simple read-only inspection, and the description covers purpose plus the important privacy caveat. This is complete for its complexity level.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so there's nothing for the description to document. With zero parameters, the baseline score is 4 per the rubric, and the description adds no harmful or irrelevant parameter info.

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 tool shows server configuration, safety modes, limits, and blocked paths. It uses a specific verb ('Show') with a clear resource (server configuration). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, but there's no obvious sibling that overlaps with this functionality.

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 description implies this is a read-only informational tool for inspecting server configuration. It doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives, but the context signals (0 parameters, readOnly hint) make its purpose self-evident as a status/inspection tool.

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