pmg_relay_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly marks the tool as READ-ONLY, indicates configuration requirements, and describes the return type. It does not cover error cases or rate limits, but for a read-only operation this is sufficient.

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 three sentences long, each serving a distinct purpose: stating operation and requirement, describing return value, and clarifying endpoint location. No unnecessary words, well structured.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, read-only, has output schema), the description covers all necessary context: what it does, prerequisites, return value, and endpoint path. No missing information for an agent to correctly invoke the 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 only parameter (proximo_target) is fully documented in the schema with a description of its purpose and default behavior. The description does not add additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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 the tool is READ-ONLY and gets PMG SMTP relay/smarthost configuration. It specifies the return value (full mail config section) and notes the API path, distinguishing it from any potential separate relay endpoint.

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 mentions the prerequisite (PROXIMO_PMG_* config) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. However, there are no obvious sibling tools for relay config, so context is adequate but not comprehensive.

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