get_terminal_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should cover behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation ('Get'), but fails to disclose any side effects, authentication needs, or configuration prerequisites. The lack of depth leaves the agent with limited understanding of the tool's behavior.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and clearly communicates the tool's purpose without excess.

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 getter with no parameters and an existing output schema (though not shown), the description is sufficiently complete. It could mention the type of settings, but the output schema likely covers that. Minor improvement possible.

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 has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not add any parameter information, but since there are none, this is acceptable. Schema description coverage is 100%, meeting expectations.

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 explicitly states the tool retrieves 'SSH / Telnet terminal access settings,' clearly identifying the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from other get_* tools in the sibling list by being unique to terminal settings.

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 usage when terminal settings are needed but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or prerequisites. Given the sibling list, no directly competing tool exists, so implied usage is acceptable.

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