opn_get_config_section

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions automatic loading if unscanned and lists common sections, but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or disclose any side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with the main action, and well-structured with clear sections. 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 an output schema exists, the description adequately covers usage flow, return type (dict with 'section' and 'data'), and context. Lacks explanation for one parameter but is otherwise 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 description adds meaning to the 'section' parameter by listing common values and highlighting the 'filter' section. However, it does not explain the 'include_sensitive' parameter, despite 0% schema description coverage.

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?

Clearly states it retrieves a specific config section as structured JSON, and distinguishes itself from siblings like opn_scan_config and opn_list_firewall_rules by explaining its role post-scan and highlighting the 'filter' section for legacy rules not visible elsewhere.

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?

Provides guidance to use after opn_scan_config and mentions auto-loading if not scanned. But lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison to other config retrieval tools.

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