get_required_action_config_description

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

No annotations provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits (e.g., idempotency, authentication needs). It only states it is a read operation ('Get'), but lacks details on side effects, rate limits, or any restrictions. Basic transparency is insufficient without 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?

A single sentence that conveys the purpose without redundancy. Every word earns its place; no fluff or unnecessary details. Front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 get operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not explain what 'configuration description' means or hint at the return format, which would help the agent understand the response.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (realm, alias). The description adds 'by alias' but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Meets baseline for full schema coverage.

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 the configuration description for a required action by alias, using specific verb 'Get' and resource 'configuration description for a required action'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_required_action (which gets the required action itself) and get_required_action_config (which gets the config, not its description).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_required_action or get_required_action_config. The description does not mention prerequisites, preferred context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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