get_rag_config_api_v1_retrieval_config_get

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the action without any details about authentication, side effects, or safety. A read operation is implied but not confirmed.

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 extremely concise at three words, which is appropriate for a simple getter with no parameters. However, it sacrifices clarity and completeness; it could be expanded to include what the config represents without being lengthy.

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 absence of parameters and output schema, the description should explain what the RAG configuration includes or the purpose of the tool. It does not, leaving the agent without context. The sibling 'update_rag_config' suggests mutability, but no further info is provided.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (by default). With no parameters to document, the baseline score is 4, but the description does not add any information about what the config contains or its structure. Thus, the value added is minimal, resulting in a 3.

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 'Get Rag Config' identifies a verb and resource, but 'Rag Config' is ambiguous; it likely means RAG configuration, but the description lacks specificity about what exactly is retrieved. It distinguishes from the sibling 'update_rag_config' as a read operation, but is too vague.

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 guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_embedding_config' or other configuration getters. The agent receives no context for selection.

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