get_mobile_app_config

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context about response format or potential edge cases. It does not contradict annotations but also doesn't go beyond them.

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?

A single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action. No filler words. Perfectly 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?

For a simple get-by-id tool, the description covers the core purpose. No output schema exists, so the term 'details' provides some expectation but could be more explicit about the response structure. However, given the simplicity and annotation support, it's sufficiently complete.

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?

The input schema has one parameter with 100% coverage, including a description for sys_id. The tool description doesn't add extra meaning beyond what the schema already states. The term 'specific' aligns with the sys_id parameter, but no format or usage details are provided.

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?

Description clearly states the action (get details) and resource (specific mobile app configuration). It distinguishes from siblings like list_mobile_app_configs and create_mobile_app_config by focusing on a single configuration identified by sys_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 implies use when you have a specific mobile app config sys_id and need its details. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the word 'specific' clearly sets it apart from listing or creating. Given the simple getter nature, the context is clear enough.

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