pbs_s3_client_get

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly declares 'READ-ONLY' and notes 'secret-free', both key behavioral traits. However, it omits details about error handling (e.g., if config not found) or authorization requirements.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with the critical 'READ-ONLY' prefix. Every word serves a purpose; no redundancy or filler.

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 existence of an output schema and the tool's simplicity (2 params), the description covers the essential purpose, read-only nature, and a dependency. It lacks explicit mention of return structure or error cases, but the output schema fills the gap.

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% and parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional clarification beyond identifying the overall action. The 'secret-free' hint is about the response, not parameters.

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 the verb ('get'), the resource ('one PBS S3 client config'), and the scope ('full secret-free shape'). It uniquely identifies this tool as a single-config retrieval operation and is easily distinguishable from siblings like pbs_s3_client_list or pbs_s3_client_create.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config') which guides usage. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the name and context naturally imply usage for reading a specific config; listing is handled by pbs_s3_client_list.

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