get_company_setting

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It adds a useful behavioral detail: 'Returns the setting with decoded value if it was encoded.' However, it does not mention error handling, authentication requirements, or how pagination parameters affect results, leaving room for more disclosure.

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, well-structured sentence with no redundant information. It efficiently conveys the core action and a key behavior.

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?

For a simple get tool, the description covers the essential intent and the decoding behavior. No output schema is provided, so the return value is only vaguely described as 'the setting,' but the parameter schema handles the optional fields. It could further clarify the purpose of offset/limit for line-based settings, but overall it's reasonably complete.

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 covers all 8 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond naming the key; it doesn't elaborate on optional filters like type, owner, or environment.

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's function: 'Get a specific company setting by key name.' It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('company setting'), and narrows scope ('specific... by key name'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_company_settings and search_in_setting.

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 phrase 'specific... by key name' implies the tool is for retrieving a single known setting, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it instead of list or search alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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