list_config_ui

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the GET endpoint but no further behavioral context such as authentication needs, response shape, or side effects; it is consistent with the 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?

The description is extremely concise, with the core operation stated first and the endpoint provided in a separate line. Every element is useful, and there is no filler or repetition of structured data.

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 parameterless, read-only tool with annotations and an output schema, the endpoint and resource name provide enough context for a safe call. The only notable omission is guidance on how this differs from the similarly named get_config_ui_by_id tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema leaves nothing undocumented. The description correctly adds no parameter details because there is nothing to explain.

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 ('Read') and resource ('UiConfig'), and includes the exact endpoint, making the operation clear. It is distinguishable from the config sibling tools by the endpoint, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_config_ui_by_id.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus its siblings, such as get_config_ui_by_id or the other list_config_* tools. The endpoint implies a full-resource read, but the description never states that intent or names an alternative.

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