get_config_values

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only mentions cross-referencing as an additional behavior. It does not disclose whether it is read-only, error handling (e.g., missing key), performance considerations, or any side effects. The information is minimal.

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 very concise, consisting of two sentences with no fluff. The key actions and features are front-loaded, making it quick to parse.

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 simplicity (2 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers the essential purpose but lacks details on usage context and behavioral outcomes. The cross-reference feature is mentioned but not elaborated, leaving some incompleteness for a fully informed decision.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by key name' and 'optional section filter', mapping to the two parameters, but provides no detail on key format, section format, or constraints. The description adds basic meaning but lacks sufficient detail for effective use.

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 tool does a lookup of config/INI values by key name, with an optional section filter. It further specifies cross-referencing with UPROPERTY(Config) C++ symbols, which adds specific context and differentiates it from siblings like search_config.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_config. The cross-reference mention hints at a use case but does not state when to prefer it over siblings. There is no when-not or alternatives listed.

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