Get sandbox settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it covers size (~270 settings), the effect of the search parameter (narrows and returns documentation), and the fallback behavior (full name/value list without help text). It also frames the operation as a read, implying no side effects. This is strong behavioral disclosure for a read tool.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then details. No wasted words; every clause adds useful 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?

For a read-only tool with two optional params and an output schema, the description covers the main use case, volume expectations, and search behavior. It even ties into a sibling tool (pz_set_sandbox). Thus 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?

Schema already documents both parameters with 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantics for `search`, giving example terms and explaining it also returns in-file documentation, which goes beyond the schema. `service_id` is adequately covered by schema.

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 tool reads sandbox tuning (SandboxVars.lua) and lists example settings (zombie population, speed, loot rarity), which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes itself by instructing to call this before pz_set_sandbox, differentiating it from sibling configuration tools.

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 explicitly says to call this before pz_set_sandbox to get real setting names and enum numbers, providing a concrete use case. It also advises using `search` to narrow results. It doesn't mention alternatives explicitly, but the guidance is clear.

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