get_golden_config_trees

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Get' but does not explicitly confirm the operation is read-only, free of side effects, or list any permissions or pagination. The second paragraph explains the domain concept rather than the tool's runtime behavior.

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 compact: one sentence states the action and a second provides relevant background. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no extraneous content.

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 parameter-less list operation with an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly identifies the resource and offers context about what golden configuration trees are. It does not mention pagination, but this is likely unnecessary for a simple get-all 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The description adds useful domain context about golden configuration trees, meeting the baseline for parameter-less tools.

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 opening sentence 'Get all Golden Configuration trees from Itential Platform' uses a specific verb and resource, and clearly indicates scope. This distinguishes it from write-oriented siblings like create_golden_config_tree.

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 the tool is for retrieving all golden configuration trees, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of related tools such as get_templates or create_golden_config_tree. No alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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