Get Configuration

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides minimal behavioral context. It does not disclose whether this requires an active connection, whether it mutates state, or what the return format looks like. It simply states a read operation.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and scope. It is appropriately sized and contains no extraneous information.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimal but arguably sufficient for a basic getter. However, without any behavioral context or usage guidance, an agent might not know when this tool is appropriate or what to expect, leaving some 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?

There are zero parameters, which is appropriate for a getter that retrieves configuration info. The description does not need to explain parameters, so this is fine. Baseline for zero params is 4.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'configuration', with the scope 'number of configurations and current configuration'. This is precise and distinguishes it from siblings like zemax_set_current_configuration or zemax_get_configuration_operands by focusing on the count and current index.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites or related tools (e.g., use before setting configurations).

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