get_mask_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Read back' implies a non-mutating read, and the output schema covers return values, but there is no mention of prerequisites, state dependence, or whether the config is instrument-side or software-side. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Nothing extraneous; the manual reference is a compact pointer rather than padding.

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 parameterless read tool with an output schema, the return values are already documented structurally, so the description only needs to establish purpose. It does that, though it omits any note about when the configuration is meaningful (e.g., after configure_mask).

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline 4 applies. There is nothing for the description to clarify about inputs.

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 ('read back') and resource ('pass/fail test configuration'), which maps cleanly to mask configuration. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby configure_mask / get_mask_result siblings, but the resource name is specific enough to be identifiable.

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 guidance on when to call it, whether it requires configure_mask to have run first, or how it relates to get_mask_result. The only contextual hint is the '(manual 3.15)' reference, which is not actionable for tool selection.

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