pbs_acme_plugin_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It declares READ-ONLY nature, includes raw data credential blob, and mandates sensitive handling. This is sufficient but does not cover rate limits or auth details beyond the config requirement.

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 sentences, front-loaded with 'READ-ONLY' and key info. Concisely states purpose, behavior, and prerequisites with no waste.

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?

Given only 2 parameters, no nested objects, and presence of output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers what the tool does, security implications, and config requirement. Return values are handled by output 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it implies plugin_id identifies the plugin but no extra 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 clearly states 'READ-ONLY: get one PBS ACME plugin's full config', specifying the verb (get), resource (PBS ACME plugin's full config), and includes a notable detail about the credential blob. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbs_acme_plugin_create, update, delete, and list.

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 provides guidance on handling the result as sensitive and the requirement for PROXIMO_PBS_* config. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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