pbs_realm_openid_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 behavior, omits client_key from the output, and mentions a required configuration dependency (PROXIMO_PBS_*). This is sufficient for a simple get tool.

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 extremely concise (two lines), front-loads 'read-only', and contains no superfluous words. Every sentence adds value.

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 the presence of an output schema (so return values are covered), the description adequately explains the tool's purpose, read-only nature, and a key behavioral constraint (no client_key). It could mention that the realm must exist, but overall it is sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage of parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no new parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves one OpenID realm's config, is read-only, and notes that client_key is never included. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pbs_realm_openid_create, delete, update, 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 implies usage for fetching a specific realm's config, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools. However, context from siblings (list vs get) makes it clear.

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