Get Home Assistant config

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and world-scope are covered. The description adds the return content and implies cheap orientation, but says nothing about auth requirements, cost, or caching; the instance-targeting refusal rule lives in the schema, not the description. Adequate, but not rich additional context.

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?

Two tight sentences with the returned fields front-loaded and the orientation hint second. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return payload and does so by enumerating the key fields. For a zero-required-param read tool this is close to complete; only a note on response shape (flat object vs nested) is missing.

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 100% and the single optional instance_id is thoroughly documented in the schema, including the refusal behavior when targeting a different home. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('core Home Assistant configuration') and enumerates exactly what is included: version, location name, time zone, unit system, loaded integrations/components. This cleanly separates it from siblings such as ha_get_system_log or ha_list_config_entries, which return different artifacts.

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?

'A good first call to understand the instance' gives an explicit usage context, which is real guidance for an agent orienting itself. It does not name an alternative or state when-not to use it, so it falls short of the 5-level routing guidance.

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