get_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds 'no secrets' to set expectations about what will not be returned, and lists the contained configuration aspects. It does not explicitly mention side effects, but 'Return' implies a read-only operation, making it reasonably transparent.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by practical usage examples. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple no-argument config getter, the description covers the main purpose and key contents. It stops short of specifying the exact return format, but since there is no output schema, this is a minor gap; the examples suffice for most 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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description's enumeration of return contents adds context beyond the empty schema, making it clear what the tool provides even though no parameters are needed.

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 'Return the MCP's runtime configuration' with a specific verb and resource, and enumerates concrete items (download paths, ports, concurrency limits, username). This differentiates it from sibling tools like search or download.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use this to check where files are being downloaded, which ports are configured, concurrency limits, and the connected username,' providing clear use cases. However, it does not name alternative tools or when not to use it, though no obvious overlap exists with siblings.

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