get_byos_config

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: read-only, deterministic, no network calls, no secrets exposed. It also notes the return structure. Could mention error handling for invalid provider, but schema covers validation.

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 well-structured with three clear paragraphs: purpose, usage guidelines, and return details. No redundant sentences, appropriately sized for the information provided.

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 the tool has no output schema, the description fully explains the return format (three sections) and key properties (plain-text string, credentials server-side). No gaps remain for agent understanding.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already provides detailed descriptions for each enum value. The tool description does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool generates a BYOS configuration for a specific storage provider, using a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('Bring-Your-Own-Storage configuration for an UploadKit Next.js handler'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like scaffold_provider by focusing on config generation.

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?

Explicitly states 'When to use:' with specific triggers (compliance, existing infra, vendor lock-in). Does not provide when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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