alopeyk_get_config

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It declares the tool as 'read-only', requires an access_token, and outlines the return type (service-wide settings). No contradictions. Missing details on rate limits or error behavior, but adequate for a simple getter.

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 with a clear structure: purpose, Persian line, endpoint, return summary, and args. The Persian line adds minor bloat but does not harm. Every sentence adds value.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it already summarizes them well. It covers auth, parameters, and endpoint. Slightly missing error scenarios, but overall sufficient for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the single optional parameter 'instance' as 'Configured instance to use (default when omitted)', clarifying its role and default behavior beyond the schema's type anyOf.

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 'Get the On-Demand service configuration (read-only)' and provides the endpoint, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle orders, profiles, cities, etc.

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 mentions the prerequisite of an access_token and implies it is for reading configuration, but does not explicitly specify when to use this over alternatives or provide when-not scenarios. Sibling tools are not compared.

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