get_slice_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states 'without slicing anything', which indicates the tool is non-destructive and read-only. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as required permissions, file format limitations, or potential errors.

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 that is perfectly concise, with no extraneous information. Every word adds value, and the key point about not slicing is front-loaded.

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 3 parameters and no output schema. The description adequately explains the tool's purpose and behavior, but lacks details about what the returned settings look like or how to interpret them. For a complete understanding, an agent would benefit from knowing the output structure.

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% coverage for parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by mentioning 'saved 3MF template or a JSON/config slicer profile', which elaborates on the source_path parameter, but does not add significant additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 'inspect' and the resource 'slicer settings from a saved 3MF template or a JSON/config slicer profile', and explicitly distinguishes itself from slicing operations. This differentiates it from sibling tools like slice_with_template or slice_stl, which perform actual slicing.

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 usage for inspecting settings without slicing, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_stl_info or list_templates. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are given, so the agent must infer the use case.

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