jekyll_config_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses redaction of sensitive keys, explicitly promises no API keys/tokens/credentials are returned, and states 'Read-only'. It stops short of describing which config files are merged or their precedence order, but the safety-relevant behavior is unusually well covered.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the redaction guarantee, then the read-only nature. No filler and every clause carries information.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives enough to call it correctly and anticipate redacted results. It does not explain how multiple config files (e.g. _config.yml plus environment overrides) are combined, which is a minor gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description adds nothing parameter-related, but nothing is needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read Jekyll configuration (_config.yml etc.)') and immediately adds the distinguishing qualifier that output is redacted. This separates it cleanly from siblings like jekyll_project_info or jekyll_project_scan, which serve different purposes.

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?

'Use to understand site settings' gives an implied context for invoking the tool, but there are no explicit when-not conditions and no named alternatives among the many jekyll_* siblings. The usage guidance is present but minimal.

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