transportsByConfig

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails completely. It doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation (though 'retrieves' implies it), what permissions might be required, whether it has side effects, rate limits, or what format the returned data takes. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this minimal description provides essentially no behavioral context beyond the basic verb 'retrieves'.

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 extremely concise at just three words, which is appropriately brief for what it attempts to communicate. There's no wasted verbiage or unnecessary elaboration. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of being under-specified rather than efficiently informative. The single sentence structure is clear but lacks the front-loaded detail that would make it more helpful.

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 that there are no annotations and no output schema, the description provides inadequate context for understanding this tool's role and behavior. While the schema covers the parameters well, the description fails to explain what 'transports' are in this context, what the retrieval returns, or how this tool fits among the many transport-related sibling tools. For a tool with 2 parameters and no structured behavioral hints, this minimal description leaves too many questions unanswered.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, meaning both parameters (configUri and targets) are documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides. According to the scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline score is 3 even with no parameter information in the description. The description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 transports by configuration' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'transportsByConfig' with minimal additional information. While it indicates a retrieval action and mentions 'transports' and 'configuration', it doesn't specify what kind of transports (e.g., software transports, data transports) or provide any distinguishing details from sibling tools like 'transportInfo', 'transportConfigurations', or 'createTransportsConfig'. The purpose remains vague without concrete context about what 'transports' means in this system.

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 absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools related to transports (transportInfo, transportConfigurations, createTransportsConfig, userTransports, etc.), but the description offers no comparison, prerequisites, or context about when this specific retrieval method is appropriate. The agent receives no help in distinguishing this tool's use case from other transport-related operations.

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