get_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only, side-effect-free operation, which is adequate but minimal. It does not mention authentication requirements, response shape, or whether settings are returned in full, leaving some ambiguity for a tool with zero annotation support.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It states the action and resource directly, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple no-parameter getter, the description is minimally sufficient, but it lacks detail about what is included in the returned settings or whether there are any operational caveats. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context about the response content would make it fully complete.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed since the input schema is empty and no configuration choices are required.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current NanoIDP settings'), making it clear this is a read operation for the settings state. It is easily distinguishable from siblings like update_settings or save_config, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_oidc_discovery or other config-related getters.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to call this tool versus siblings like update_settings or get_oidc_discovery, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context in which it should be used.

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