get_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Read' which discloses the non-destructive nature, and 'active JSON config' indicates the source and format. It does not mention any side effects or special behaviors, but for a read tool this is sufficient transparency.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Read'. It contains no filler and every word adds value, making it highly efficient.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and the meaning of the path. It indicates the output format (JSON config) but does not elaborate on potential errors or response structure, which is acceptable for a straightforward read operation.

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 input schema has one optional path parameter with a default empty string. The description adds meaning by explaining that the path is for reading a subpath below /config/{path}, which clarifies its semantics beyond the schema's bare type/default.

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 tool reads Caddy's active JSON config with an optional path. It uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('Caddy's active JSON config'), and the mention of '/config/{path}' distinguishes it from siblings like load_config and patch_config which imply write operations.

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 provides context that the tool reads configuration, implying it should be used when you need to inspect the current config. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for writing/configuring, leaving the differentiation to the sibling tool names.

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