Open WebUI MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the 'ADMIN ONLY' permission requirement, which is valuable context beyond what the empty input schema provides. However, it doesn't describe what 'system configuration' includes, whether it's read-only (implied by 'Get'), response format, or any rate limits. The description doesn't contradict annotations since none 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?

The description is extremely concise with just two sentences that each earn their place: the first states the core purpose, the second adds critical permission context. There's zero wasted language and it's perfectly front-loaded.

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 0 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description provides adequate context. The 'ADMIN ONLY' warning addresses the main complexity consideration. However, for a system configuration tool, the description could benefit from specifying what configuration data is returned or its scope, though the output schema may cover this.

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 (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and the baseline for this situation is 4. No additional parameter information is required or 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 'Get' and resource 'system configuration', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential siblings like 'get_models_config' or 'export_config' that might also retrieve configuration data, preventing a perfect score.

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 explicitly states 'ADMIN ONLY', providing clear context about permission requirements. This helps the agent understand when to use it based on user privileges. However, it doesn't specify when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'export_config' or 'get_models_config', which could also provide configuration-related data.

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