Get Scaleway bucket CORS rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail: the tool throws NoSuchCORSConfiguration when no rules are set, which helps agents handle errors. This goes beyond annotation coverage.

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 exceptionally concise—two short sentences—with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and error behavior without any filler, fully earning its place.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and error behavior. The annotations provide safety context, and the schema handles parameters. The description is complete for its complexity, though it could optionally mention that region defaults are handled in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%; both 'bucket' and 'region' are well-documented in the schema. The description does not add any extra information about parameters, which is acceptable given the schema clarity. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Read a bucket's CORS rules') with a specific resource (bucket CORS) and directly differentiates from sibling put_bucket_cors and delete_bucket_cors tools. The verb 'Read' precisely conveys the operation.

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 implies usage (read CORS rules) but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as put_bucket_cors or delete_bucket_cors. No exclusions or contextual guidance is provided beyond the obvious name and action.

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