get_convar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only a listing of returned fields, which the existing output schema already supplies, so marginal behavioral value beyond structured data is modest.

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 sentence with zero waste, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the return payload summarized in a compact parenthetical.

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?

A simple two-parameter lookup with an output schema and full annotations, so little prose is required; the description is sufficient to call it correctly. The only missing piece is explicit routing against list_convars.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters ('game' with an inline id list, 'name' as exact convar/command name) are fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of 'variable or command' and 'exact' name reinforces the schema but adds no new parameter meaning.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Get a console variable or command') with an enumeration of what's returned (default, min/max, flags, help text). It is implicitly distinguishable from the plural sibling list_convars, but it never names that sibling to make the boundary explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by the singular 'get' framing and the exact-name requirement, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this over list_convars or search_docs, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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