get_hcl_config_reference

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get' and fails to mention whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or how it handles errors or return output. This is a significant gap for a documentation tool.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource before listing covered topics. There is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

The description does not clarify how the optional parameters interact (e.g., whether listBlocks overrides config) or what the return structure looks like, especially given there is no output schema. Agents may struggle to know how to call it effectively without more context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning, but the schema alone is sufficient, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool retrieves Terragrunt HCL block and attribute documentation with syntax and examples, and lists specific content areas (stacks, feature flags, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling reference tools like function_reference and cli_reference.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives such as search_docs or function_reference. No conditions, exclusions, or prerequisite context are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the description alone.

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