modsecurity_user_configs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a resource but does not explicitly say the tool reads/returns data, whether it has side effects, or what kind of output to expect beyond the presence of an output schema. The noun-phrase form leaves the actual behavior implicit.

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 very short and contains no filler or repetition. The key scoping detail, 'current user's', is front-loaded. It is concise, though slightly under-specified because it lacks an action verb.

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 tool with an output schema, the description is minimally viable: it names the resource and scope. However, it does not clarify how this relates to the many ModSecurity sibling tools, nor does it state the type of data returned. Given the number of related tools, more context would help an agent select it confidently.

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 zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource ('current user's ModSecurity configs') and scope, so an agent can tell it returns user-level configuration data. It lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as modsecurity_all_configs or modsecurity_host_config.

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 phrase 'current user's' implies this tool is appropriate when retrieving the caller's own ModSecurity configuration. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over related tools like modsecurity_all_configs or modsecurity_host_config, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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