DEX module configuration

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 known. The description adds value by listing the specific returned fields (ruleset ID, statuses, initial score prepared flag, lastVisitedProfileId) and explaining the cross-tool usability of that ID, which goes beyond the annotation-only information.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the purpose and then lists all key output components. Each listed item adds meaning, and there is no filler, though the long enumeration makes it slightly less scannable than ideal.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fully self-contained: it enumerates every return value and even explains how one return value (lastVisitedProfileId) can be used in sibling tools. Nothing more is needed to invoke or interpret this tool.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema is trivially fully covered. Per the baseline rule for zero-parameter tools, the description doesn't need to convey parameter meaning, and it correctly provides no irrelevant parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieves') tied to a clear resource ('DEX module configuration and feature flags') and enumerates the exact items returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling DEX tools by focusing on configuration/feature flags and by explaining how lastVisitedProfileId is usable in the other DEX score tools.

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 clearly implies when this tool is relevant — when you need configuration flags or a score profile ID to pass to dex_device_experience, dex_device_experience_metrics, or dex_latest_experience_scores. It provides strong contextual guidance without explicitly naming alternatives or exclusions, which fits the 'clear context, no exclusions' level.

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