Oxidized Config Get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by saying the configuration is 'stored' and sourced 'from Oxidized', which clarifies this is a retrieval of existing data rather than a live fetch or mutation. It does not go further into error or availability behavior, but that is acceptable given the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place: the verb, the data source, the resource, and the selection criterion are all present.

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 single-parameter getter with a true output schema and annotations covering safety and idempotency, this description is complete. An agent can confidently invoke it when it needs a stored Oxidized config for a specific hostname. No critical operational information is missing.

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 documents hostname with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add much. It reinforces that hostname selects the specific device, but it adds no format, validation, or fallback information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('stored device configuration from Oxidized'), and a clear target ('for a specific device'). This distinguishes it from siblings like oxidized_config_search and oxidized_list by emphasizing a direct, single-device retrieval rather than searching or listing.

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 clearly implies the right context: use when you need the stored Oxidized configuration for a known device and you have its hostname. It does not explicitly contrast with oxidized_config_search or oxidized_list, so there is a slight gap in when-not-to-use guidance, but the intended scenario is clear.

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