elster_config_show

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: secrets are redacted, which is important for an agent to know. Without annotations, this adds value. However, it does not detail whether the tool reads from files, environment, or cache, but for a display tool 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?

One sentence that is perfectly concise with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and adds necessary context.

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 display tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the purpose, output behavior (redacted secrets), and usage context (verification of env vars/config).

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 tool has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. It provides context about what is shown (config, secrets redacted) beyond the empty schema.

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 shows the currently loaded ELSTER configuration with secrets redacted, specifying the action (show), resource (config), and a key detail (redaction). It distinguishes from sibling tools which are action-oriented (start, list, generate, etc.).

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 implies the tool is used to verify environment variables or config.json were picked up, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The purpose is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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