prettyPrinterSetting

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Retrieves,' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output looks like (e.g., format or structure). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential action and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse for an AI agent.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'pretty printer settings' entail (e.g., configuration details, format), how the retrieval works (e.g., returns a JSON object, list of options), or any dependencies. For a tool with no structured output information, this leaves the agent guessing about the result.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter details in the description. The baseline for this scenario is 4, as the description appropriately avoids redundant information and focuses on the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration on inputs.

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 'Retrieves the pretty printer settings' clearly states the action (retrieves) and resource (pretty printer settings), which is adequate. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'setPrettyPrinterSetting' or 'prettyPrinter', leaving some ambiguity about its specific scope compared to related operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'setPrettyPrinterSetting' (for updating) and 'prettyPrinter' (likely for applying formatting), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions for this retrieval operation.

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