openclaw_setup_show

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that tokens are not printed and that the default instance is used if not specified. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only or what happens if the instance does not exist.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose, and the second adds a critical behavioral note and usage hint. Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description could have explained the return format or error behavior. It only says 'gateway configuration', which is vague. For a simple show tool with one parameter, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds that passing 'instance' inspects a non-default one, which is redundant with the schema. No additional parameter meaning is provided.

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 verb 'Show' and resource 'currently resolved gateway configuration'. It distinguishes itself from token-related tools by explicitly saying 'Does NOT print tokens', but does not differentiate from sibling setup tools like openclaw_setup_list.

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?

Provides context on default behavior and how to inspect non-default instances, but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings like openclaw_setup_list or openclaw_setup_select_default.

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