Locate PZ config files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that server names are host-assigned, so paths cannot be guessed, and that this is a discovery operation. It doesn't mention caching/refresh behavior (left to the schema) or side effects, but for a read-only locate operation, it provides useful context beyond simple restatement.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word earns its place. The second sentence adds essential guidance without redundancy.

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 tool's low complexity (2 optional params) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It states what is returned (absolute paths), which files, and when to call it, making it self-sufficient for an agent.

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 schema covers both parameters thoroughly: refresh's description explains cache bypass, and service_id's description explains Nitrado service id and default. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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's purpose: 'Discover the absolute paths of this server's config files'. It names specific file types (<name>.ini, _SandboxVars.lua, _spawnregions.lua) and distinguishes it from siblings by emphasizing the host-assigned naming and need to call before touching config paths.

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?

It provides explicit usage context: 'the server name is host-assigned, so call this before touching any config path instead of guessing filenames.' This indicates when the tool should be used relative to other config/file tools, though it doesn't name specific sibling alternatives.

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