Get agent configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds the endpoint and authorization class, which provides some behavioral context beyond annotations, but does not disclose additional traits like side effects or response details.

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 very brief with only two short sentences and a line. While it avoids fluff, it is under-specified and fails to convey necessary information about parameters and usage, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not required to describe return values), the description still lacks parameter semantics and usage guidance. For a simple one-parameter tool, the description is incomplete and leaves the agent unsure how to invoke it correctly.

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 only parameter (path.id) is not described in the schema (0% schema description coverage) and the description does not explain its purpose or format. The agent ID is mentioned only implicitly in the endpoint path. This is a critical gap for correct usage.

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 agent configuration with 'Get agent configuration'. It also specifies the HTTP method and path. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like pc_get_agents_by_id or pc_get_agents_by_id_runtime_state, which also retrieve agent data.

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 provides an authorization class ('board_or_agent'), giving some context on who can use it, but it offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or usage scenarios.

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