Get C2 Configs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description is not required to repeat those. It adds context by listing the retrieved fields but does not disclose behavioral traits beyond annotations, such as rate limits or data freshness.

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 a single sentence listing many fields, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., grouping fields) to improve readability, but it is not verbose.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description bears the burden of explaining return values. It lists several fields but does not specify the structure (e.g., nested objects, data types). For a tool returning potentially complex configurations, the description is somewhat incomplete.

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 zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. A baseline of 4 is warranted as the description is clear about what the tool returns without needing to elaborate on inputs.

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 'Get full C2 beacon configurations' as a specific verb+resource and enumerates fields like sleep times, jitter, user agents, etc. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling C2 tools like get_c2_stats or get_c2_operators, which focus on specific aspects.

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 implies use when retrieving comprehensive C2 config data but does not provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives like get_c2_stats or get_c2_operators. No explicit exclusion criteria are given.

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