get_general_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the cache-based behavior, absence of API calls, and the need for a prior sync, which is valuable beyond a simple 'get' statement. It doesn't cover error cases or stale data, but the key behavioral traits are clearly stated.

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?

Three short sentences, all informative, with the main purpose front-loaded. No redundant or vague text.

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 read operation, the description fully covers what the tool does and the prerequisite. Although there is no output schema, the list of included sections gives a clear sense of the return content. It could mention the return format, but it isn't essential.

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 schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for projectId. The tool description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies; no deduction or bonus.

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 retrieves 'General settings' and enumerates the specific content (App Details, App Assets, Nav Bar & App Bar), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing the FlutterFlow 'General' settings section, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools.

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?

It provides clear context: 'Cache-based, no API calls' and instructs to 'Run sync_project first,' implying the prerequisite and typical use case. It doesn't specify when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for a read-only cache tool.

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