Get PostgreSQL parameters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful Patroni-specific behavioral fact that direct postgresql.conf edits are reverted, giving real context beyond annotations, but discloses nothing about the returned shape or failure modes.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with a tight parenthetical; every clause adds information. Slightly dense but no waste.

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 simple read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition is adequate but does not describe what the returned parameters look like. An agent knows what to fetch but not the response format.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with name, context, and namespace all documented inline, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no parameter syntax or defaults of its own; baseline 3 applies.

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 names the exact resource (tuned PostgreSQL parameters) and pinpoints the source path `spec.patroni.dynamicConfiguration.postgresql.parameters`, which lets an agent distinguish it from get_pgbouncer_config and get_cluster. It lacks an explicit retrieval verb, but the resource and source are specific enough to convey purpose.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the agent can infer this is the read path for PostgreSQL tuning. The 'only correct place to set them' remark hints at write semantics but never says when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_cluster or get_cluster_status, and gives no prerequisites.

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