Get config summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the returned content (domain size, cell count, object count), which is genuine context, but nothing about cost, caching, or preconditions.

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 core sentence is tight and front-loaded, but the appended rule fragment ("[bulc-mcp rules] GEN-006, GEN-010, GEN-016 — bulc_knowledge_search \"<id>\"") is cryptic noise that does not help selection or invocation.

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 zero-parameter, read-only summary tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the agent gets back. The only shortfall is the absence of routing guidance against similar summary tools.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. There are no parameter semantics to document, and the description correctly avoids inventing any.

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 ("Get a summary of the current FDS configuration") and enumerates what is summarized (domain size, cell count, object count). It is clear on its own, though it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_project_summary or get_simulation_metrics.

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 statement of when to call this versus alternatives like get_project_summary or get_simulation_settings. The trailing rule reference (GEN-006 etc.) is a compliance pointer, not usage guidance for the agent.

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