appconfig_kv_show

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

No annotations are available, so the description must bear the full burden. While 'Show' implies a read operation, no details are given about side effects, error behavior (e.g., key not found), authentication needs, or the structure of the response. The description is too sparse for a tool with zero annotations.

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 brief with the main action in the first line. The Args list is redundant with the schema but not excessively long. It is well front-loaded and free of unnecessary prose, earning a high score.

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 has 4 parameters and an output schema, the description fails to mention any prerequisites, error handling, or behavior for optional fields like label. While the output schema exists, the lack of usage context leaves the agent underinformed for proper invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning the description must compensate. The Args list adds that resource_group is optional and label defaults to 'no label,' which clarifies beyond the schema's raw defaults. However, the value is minimal, and key parameters like store_name and key have no additional explanation.

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 'Show a specific key-value from an App Configuration store,' which is a specific verb and resource. While sibling tools like appconfig_kv_list and appconfig_kv_set exist, the name and description sufficiently differentiate the action (single retrieval vs. listing or setting).

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 is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., appconfig_kv_list). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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