get_mqtt_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention that secrets are excluded, which is a useful redaction behavior, but does not describe other traits like whether it requires authentication or what happens if no config is set.

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, compact sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to scan, and every word earns its place.

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 (no params, output schema exists), the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states what is returned and an important caveat (secrets excluded). It could be slightly more complete by mentioning when to use it, but overall it is adequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema fully covers the parameter side (baseline 4). The description adds a little semantic value about the output scope ('MQTT target, excluding secrets'), but it is not required for parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') with a clear resource ('configured MQTT target') and adds a key qualifier ('excluding secrets'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling publish_message by clearly being a read operation for configuration.

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 its use case (reading MQTT config) but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or any exclusions. The sibling publish_message is different, but no direct comparison or guidance is provided.

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