bookshelf_get_config_host

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already declares. It says 'List', which is consistent with the annotation, but does not disclose any additional traits such as return format, pagination, or whether it lists all hosts. The annotation covers the safety aspect, but the description contributes minimal extra value.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the verb and object, and it is appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters. It earns its place by stating the core purpose without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, readOnly annotation, output schema present), the description is minimally complete. However, it is ambiguous what 'config host' refers to, and it does not clarify whether this lists all hosts or a single one, especially with the sibling get_config_host_by_id. The output schema likely covers return values, so the description is adequate for basic invocation but lacks clarity for broader understanding.

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 the schema is empty. With 0 params, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds nothing beyond the schema, which is already complete. This is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 'List config host' clearly states the action (list) and resource (config host), but it does not differentiate from many sibling config tools like get_config_development or get_config_downloadclient. It also adds little beyond the tool name itself, though it clarifies that this is a list operation rather than a single-item get, which is useful given the presence of get_config_host_by_id.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_config_host_by_id. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on selecting this tool among the many config getters.

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