get_config

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

With no annotations provided, the verb 'Show' is the main behavioral signal, indicating a read-only operation. The description does not disclose whether authentication is required, where the config comes from, or what happens if no config exists, but for a zero-parameter display tool this is a tolerable gap.

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 short sentence with no filler or redundant detail. Every word contributes to identifying the operation.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema tool, this description conveys the core action but not the return format or any prerequisites. It is minimally adequate, yet leaves the agent to assume what config content will be shown.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds scope by naming 'kaggle CLI config' as the target of the operation, which is all that is needed here.

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 names a clear action ('Show') and a specific resource ('kaggle CLI config'). No sibling tool overlaps with retrieving CLI configuration, making this a precise, non-tautological statement.

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 for inspecting Kaggle CLI configuration, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. Since all siblings are for kernels, datasets, models, and competitions, the intended use is inferable rather than clearly guided.

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