get_lag_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It doesn't state that this is a read-only operation, whether it requires auth, what the global scope implies, or any side effects. The phrase 'global configuration' hints at scope but doesn't clarify behavior. LACP global config could be large; no mention of output format or size.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded, but it's a fragment that restates the name rather than stating an action. Not verbose, but it doesn't earn its place by adding information beyond the tool name.

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, return values needn't be explained. However, with no annotations and a terse description, the definition is incomplete: it doesn't say the tool is a read, doesn't mention authentication or rate limits, and doesn't differentiate from siblings like get_stp_config or get_loopguard_config. For a config retrieval tool, this leaves gaps.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. No parameter semantics to describe, and the description doesn't invent any. Schema coverage is 100% (trivially, since no params).

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 names a specific resource (Link Aggregation / LACP global configuration) but uses a bare noun phrase with no verb, so it doesn't state what the tool does. The 'get_' prefix implies retrieval, but the description itself doesn't say 'retrieve' or 'return'. It distinguishes from sibling config tools by resource name, but only weakly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, no conditions. The agent must infer from the name that this fetches LACP config rather than setting it. Sibling names like get_stp_config suggest a pattern, but the description doesn't help select this tool over others.

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