get_config

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It is read-only in nature ('Report'), and it discloses a meaningful behavioral detail: the API key's presence is reported but its value is never exposed. This is more than a minimal description, though it stops short of explicitly stating that it has no side effects.

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 dense but every clause adds information: what is reported, what is deliberately hidden, and when to call it. No filler or repetition exists.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: it lists the returned configuration contents and the circumstances under which to invoke the tool. Nothing essential is missing.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter meaning; instead, it appropriately explains what the tool returns, which is the relevant information for an agent.

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 uses a specific verb ('Report') and a clear resource ('the current configuration'), then enumerates exactly what is included. The enumerated contents (provider, models, defaults, output directory, API key presence, model constraints) clearly distinguish this from the sibling generate_image, generate_video, and set_config 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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this before changing settings, or when the user asks which model is in use.' This tells the agent exactly when this tool is appropriate relative to set_config and the generation tools.

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