pmg_spam_config

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

The description indicates it is a read-only operation by including '(read)', which is important behavioral context. With no annotations provided, this partially compensates, but it does not disclose other traits like authentication specifics, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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, consisting of two short sentences. The most critical information (purpose, read nature, prerequisite) is front-loaded, and every word 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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it could provide more context about what specific configuration data is returned (e.g., the structure of spam filter settings). The mention of the PMG CLI path adds some technical context but falls short of full completeness.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'proximo_target', including a clear description. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning, only implying that the target must have PROXIMO_PMG_* config. 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?

Description clearly states 'Get PMG spam filter configuration (read)', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'pmg_spam_config_update' by explicitly labeling it as a read operation.

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?

Mentions a prerequisite ('Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config'), providing context for when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the update counterpart, nor does it provide exclusions.

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