Reads all known router values in one paced pass to capture full local mesh state; use targeted data retrieval when you only need specific settings.
Read every known value in one pass (~70 reads, paced 1 s apart, so over a minute). Heavy on the router; use get_router_data for what you actually need.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it quantifies ~70 reads, the 1 s pacing, a duration over a minute, and the load on the router. It does not describe the shape or arrangement of the returned values, which matters for a bulk read.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the scope and immediately followed by the cost and the alternative. Every clause earns its place.
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?
Cost, pacing and duration are covered, which is what an agent most needs before invoking a minute-long bulk read. The absence of an output schema leaves the return contents ('every known value') underspecified, a minor remaining gap.
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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies.
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?
States a specific verb and scope (read every known value in one pass) and explicitly positions it against the sibling get_router_data, so an agent can distinguish the two without inspecting either schema.
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?
Names the alternative (get_router_data) and the reason to prefer it ('what you actually need'), which routes the agent away from over-reading. The positive case for using this tool – needing the complete state at once – is only implied by 'every known value'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.