get_mod_default_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects or permissions. It doesn't mention read-only nature or error behavior for unsupported mods, though the phrase 'known' hints at potential failure. Lacks explicit 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 concise, using only two sentences to convey purpose and supported mods. No redundant 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?

As a simple getter tool, the description is adequately complete. It doesn't specify the return format, but for a default config retrieval, the structure is likely standard. Without an output schema, slight ambiguity remains, but it's acceptable for this type of tool.

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 single parameter modId is fully described with examples in the schema. The description also specifies supported mods, adding context beyond the schema. Parameter semantics are clear.

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 it retrieves the default config for a specific mod, with a list of supported mods. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_mod_config, which presumably handles current configs.

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 when a default/baseline config is needed, contrasting with reading the current config. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the distinction is clear enough for an agent.

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