Fetch SCITT configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the endpoint path, that the result is JSON, and a genuinely useful trust caveat — the self-description is only 'what the operator says about itself' rather than verified truth. It omits pagination/error behavior, but adds real context beyond the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the concrete endpoint, then supporting facts in terse form. The 'Provenance: fetched' / 'Supports:' shorthand is slightly compressed jargon but each clause carries information; no filler sentences.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and the rich annotations cover the safety profile. Combined with a fully documented single parameter, an agent has what it needs to invoke this correctly; only the lack of alternative-routing guidance keeps it from a 5.

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%, so the schema fully documents baseUrl including the FORESTRIE_BASE_URL fallback. The description only mirrors baseUrl via the {baseUrl} path placeholder and adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond the schema — the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (GET) and resource (the /.well-known/scitt-configuration self-description), and enumerates what the resource contains (service id, base URL, supported algorithms). An agent can distinguish this config-fetch from the sibling fetch_receipt/fetch_genesis/fetch_accumulator calls without opening the schema.

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?

It gives some orientation ('Supports: none of the four questions; this is what the operator says about itself'), which implies when it is relevant, but it never names an alternative tool or states a condition that selects this over a sibling. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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