bookshelf_get_config_naming_by_id

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read operation. The description adds 'single' and 'by id', but no additional behavioral context such as error handling or what happens when the id does not exist. This is adequate given the annotation, but not rich.

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, focused sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter.

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 (one integer param, read-only, output schema present), the description covers the essential purpose. The lack of explanation about 'config naming' is acceptable since the tool name and context make it clear.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the id parameter, so the description must compensate. It only repeats 'by id' without explaining what kind of id or how it maps to the resource. This is minimal compensation for a low-coverage schema.

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 states a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Fetch a single config naming by id.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_config_naming (likely a list) and update_config_naming by indicating singular fetch 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools like bookshelf_get_config_naming or bookshelf_get_config_naming_examples.

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