conclave_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a read-only operation ('View') and describes the return format ('formatted JSON'), but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error behavior. It adds some context about what data is included, which is helpful but not comprehensive.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by specific details in bullet-like structure, and ends with return information. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-organized.

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's complexity (configuration viewing with multiple data points), no annotations, and an output schema present, the description is mostly complete. It lists what data is shown and the return format, but could improve by mentioning sibling differentiation or behavioral constraints like authentication needs.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly doesn't discuss parameters, earning a high baseline score for not adding unnecessary information.

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 specific action ('View current conclave configuration') and lists the exact resources it shows (member models, chairman info, presets, thresholds, API key status, custom selection). It distinguishes from siblings like 'conclave_estimate' or 'conclave_reset' by focusing on configuration viewing rather than estimation or resetting.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'conclave_models' (which might show models only) or 'conclave_full' (unclear purpose). It implies usage for viewing configuration but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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