get_config

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' and 'formatted display' but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, if it caches results, or what the formatting entails. For a critical config tool, more transparency is needed.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core function without wasted words. Every word adds value given the tool's simplicity.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description adequately covers the basic purpose. However, given the complexity of the domain (multiple config-related tools), additional context about the scope (e.g., 'complete' meaning all keys) would enhance 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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage. The description correctly reflects this by not needing to explain parameters. It adds value by clarifying the output includes 'formatted display', but no parameters to elaborate on.

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 explicitly states the action (Get) and the resource (complete configuration from config.json), and implies a read-only operation. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like update_config or reset_config by specifying it retrieves the full configuration with formatting.

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 clear purpose but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like reload_config, validate_config, or previous config state retrievals. Usage context is implied but not elaborated.

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