Dump Configurations

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it supersedes other tools, has multiple modes, filtering, summarize, and truncation. It does not mention side effects or safety, but as a read tool, this is adequate.

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 well-structured with modes and args list, front-loading the main purpose. While somewhat lengthy, every sentence adds value; minor room for tightening.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. The description covers all parameters and usage scenarios thoroughly, missing only edge cases like empty results. Overall quite complete for a complex tool.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description thoroughly explains each parameter (config_type, service_filter, filter, summarize, include_values, limit, max_chars) and their interactions, providing significant value beyond the 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 explicitly states it is a unified configuration introspection tool that supersedes other similar tools. It clearly describes the function: dump configurations, and differentiates by covering multiple modes and parameters, thus distinguishing from sibling tools which are unrelated.

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 details when to use each mode: single type vs bulk, filtering options, and summarization. It provides clear context on parameter interactions but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among siblings, though siblings are not configuration-focused.

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