Get Settings

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state that the tool only reads settings and has no side effects. The 'get' in the tool name suggests read-only behavior, but the description itself could be more explicit about what it returns and that it does not modify anything.

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 two sentences long and contains only relevant information: the scope of settings and an important operational caveat. No filler or redundant wording is present.

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?

The description mentions instance settings and notification flags, and gives a useful related warning, but it does not describe the return structure or enumerate the settings that will be present. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about what the caller receives would improve completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter details for the description to clarify. The baseline of 3 applies because there is no additional parameter meaning to add.

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 title 'Get Settings' combined with the description 'Instance settings, including notification flags' makes the tool's purpose clear. It identifies the resource and a key category of settings, though the description itself is a noun phrase rather than an explicit action statement.

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 gives a practical warning: without `incomingWebhook: yes`, incoming message logs and read receipts do not work. This implies when checking or troubleshooting settings might be useful, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like `set_settings`.

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