catalog_get_scenario_config

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no note on whether an unknown scenarioId errors, how 'of an organization' is resolved (implicit token scope?), or how expandBody/defaultConfig affect the payload.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. The trailing raw route 'GET /notification/api/scenario-configs/{scenarioId}' duplicates the annotation title and does little work.

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?

A simple read tool with a fully described schema and complete annotations, but with no output schema the description never hints at the shape of a scenario configuration or what the expansion flags return. Adequate, not complete.

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%, so all three parameters including the two optional expansion flags are already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces that scenarioId is the lookup key; it adds no semantics about expandBody/defaultConfig behavior.

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 and resource ('Retrieves a notification scenario configuration') scoped by 'scenario id of an organization'. This clearly separates it from the plural sibling catalog_get_all_scenario_configs, though the near-identical sibling catalog_get_scenario is never mentioned.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'by scenario id' — an agent can infer this is the single-item fetch versus catalog_get_all_scenario_configs. There is no explicit when-to-use, no mention of the close sibling catalog_get_scenario, and no prerequisites such as required org context.

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