nacos_get_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses automatic truncation of very long configs and that slicing is supported, which is real behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it omits what triggers truncation, whether the result is partial, permission requirements, and error behavior for missing dataId.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the core action and then its two special capabilities. No filler or redundancy, though being one long clause it is less scannable than a structured split.

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?

Five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema mean description must cover more: it explains the read and slicing but not return shape, truncation thresholds/defaults, or error cases. Adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for an agent to call it correctly in edge cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, so startLine/endLine/group/namespaceId are already fully documented in the schema. The description only generically echoes the slicing concept without adding formats, defaults, or interaction rules (e.g., how startLine/endLine interact with truncation), so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('获取 Nacos 配置项全文内容') and adds the tools' distinctive capability (truncation for long text, line-based slicing). It implicitly separates itself from listing siblings such as nacos_list_configs and nacos_get_config_history, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus nacos_list_configs or nacos_get_config_history, nor any prerequisites. The mention of '分块读取' for large text hints at a use case but stops short of prescribing it, leaving the agent to infer.

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