agents_settings_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return type ('List of inputs and their values') and a limitation ('At most 5000 rows will be returned for *table* inputs'). No side effects are expected, and nothing contradicts, though error behavior is not mentioned.

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 concise, with clear paragraphs, appropriate use of formatting (code references, bullets), and no redundant information. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool.

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?

The tool is simple, and the description adequately explains its function, return type, and a key constraint. While it lacks an output schema and detailed error conditions, the provided information is sufficient for typical use cases.

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 schema covers the single parameter with a description ('One-based agent index'), and the description adds context by suggesting agents_list to obtain valid indexes, enriching the meaning beyond the schema alone.

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's purpose: 'Get settings' and explains it fetches input keys and values for a given agent. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on retrieval (as opposed to setting, listing, etc.) and mentions the use of agents_list for indexes.

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 gives usage context by stating 'Use this tool to get all input keys and their current values' and directs users to agents_list for indexes. It does not explicitly contrast with set tools, but the intent is clear enough for typical usage.

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