get_delegate_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does signal a side-effect-free read and discloses the shape of what comes back (config keys, version, auto-update status). It doesn't mention auth requirements, failure modes, or whether secrets are redacted, which would round it out.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the returned field list front-loaded and the usage triggers appended. The field enumeration is long but earns its place because there is no output schema.

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 no output schema, annotations, or parameters, the description is the sole carrier of information — and it fully covers what is returned plus when to reach for it. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; baseline applies. The description spends its words on return values instead, which is the right allocation here.

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?

Specific verb ('Read') plus a named resource ('forge-delegate configuration'), followed by an enumeration of exactly which keys are returned. The read framing cleanly separates it from the write counterpart set_delegate_config without needing to name it.

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?

Explicitly names two triggering situations: checking what defaults will be applied when a model/directory is omitted, and answering version questions. It doesn't explicitly exclude or route to siblings like set_delegate_config, but the read-only framing makes the boundary obvious.

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