get-setting-values-v2

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

The description explains key behavioral aspects: that targetingRules are ordered, the meaning of defaultValue and percentageEvaluationAttribute, and provides a link to further documentation. For a read-only tool with no annotations, this is good disclosure.

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 slightly verbose but well-structured, with the first sentence providing the overall purpose and subsequent paragraphs detailing key response fields. Each paragraph adds value without redundancy.

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?

Without an output schema, the description compensates by explaining the important response fields. However, it lacks information on error conditions, pagination, or performance characteristics, and does not clarify how the v2 version differs from v1 or other sibling tools.

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?

Both parameters (configId and environmentId) are fully described in the input schema with type and format. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool returns Feature Flag and Setting values for a given Config and Environment. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like get-setting-value or get-setting-values, leaving ambiguity about when to use the v2 variant.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, nor any use-cases or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage from context alone.

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