Get site NGINX configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral nuance beyond 'Retrieve', which aligns. No extra context on edge cases or response behavior is provided.

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 a single sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient, conveying the essential purpose without filler.

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?

The tool is simple with two integer parameters, and annotations cover safety. The description explains the action but does not explicitly state the return format or contents, which would be helpful given no output schema. However, 'Retrieve' sufficiently implies the output is the configuration.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters ('Ploi site ID.', 'Ploi server ID.'). The description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline for high 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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'NGINX configuration for a Ploi site'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'ploi_get_site' (general site info) and 'ploi_update_site_nginx_configuration' (modification).

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 implies when to use (when needing NGINX config), but lacks alternatives or exclusions. Among many siblings, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over other site-related tools, such as contrasting with 'ploi_update_site_nginx_configuration'.

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