get_nginx_config

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

The description states '只读，不修改' (read-only), but the input schema allows a 'save' action that modifies the config file. This is a direct contradiction. Annotations are absent, so the description carries full burden but is misleading.

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 concise (two short sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it omits the save functionality, which makes it incomplete; but for what it covers, it is efficient.

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?

No output schema, and description does not explain return values or error conditions. More critically, it fails to describe the save action, leaving the tool's full behavior undocumented. Schema compensates for parameters but not for behavioral gaps.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond schema; it does not elaborate on parameters or their usage.

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 states it reads Nginx config for a specific site, and specifies the file path. It distinguishes from siblings by being specific to Nginx config. However, the claim '只读，不修改' (read-only) contradicts the schema which includes a 'save' action, reducing clarity.

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 says it is suitable for viewing reverse proxy, SSL, location rules, implying when to use. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but siblings are distinct (logs, system status, etc.), providing implicit context.

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