Retrieve your organization's external storage configuration, including provider, bucket, region, and connection status, to verify where PDFs and XMLs are stored.
Get the organization's external storage configuration. Returns the current provider, bucket, region, and connection status. External storage allows storing PDFs and XMLs in your own S3-compatible bucket.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.17Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and non-open-world behavior. The description adds useful context about what is returned (provider, bucket, region, connection status) and explains what external storage is for.
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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and return fields, followed by only relevant external-storage context. There is no wasted text.
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 zero-parameter, read-only getter with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what is retrieved, the fields returned, and the purpose of external storage.
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?
There are no parameters, so parameter semantics are minimal. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description appropriately does not invent parameter details.
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 clear verb and resource: "Get the organization's external storage configuration." It also names the returned fields, making the operation specific, though it does not explicitly contrast with storage_config_update, storage_config_test, or storage_config_delete.
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?
Usage is implied by the "Get" verb and the return fields described, but the description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus update/test/providers/delete siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.