Get IT Glue Configuration

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive, idempotent operation with open-world semantics. The description adds valuable context by specifying the types of detailed information returned (hardware details, network info, warranty status, related resources) and mentioning the optional 'response_format' parameter, which provides behavioral insight beyond the annotations.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement, bullet-point parameter explanation, and return value mention. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy, and it's appropriately sized for a tool with three parameters.

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 read-only retrieval tool with comprehensive annotations and full schema coverage, the description provides adequate context about what information is returned and parameter usage. The main gap is the absence of an output schema, but the description compensates by mentioning the return format options and types of details included.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by briefly mentioning the 'include' parameter for related resources and the return format options, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 the verb ('Get') and resource ('a single configuration by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'itglue_list_configurations' which returns multiple items. It specifies this is for retrieving detailed information about a specific device/asset, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 context by stating it retrieves 'detailed information' for a specific ID, suggesting it should be used when you need comprehensive data about one configuration rather than listing multiple. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use alternatives like 'itglue_list_configurations' for bulk retrieval or 'itglue_update_configuration' for modifications.

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