get-config

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

No annotations are present, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. The description implies a read-only operation ('get'), but does not explicitly state safety (e.g., no side effects), authentication requirements, rate limits, or output characteristics. This lack of transparency reduces trust.

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 short (one sentence), which is concise but at the cost of essential information. It does not front-load key behavioral details or parameter context. The brevity is not earned because it leaves the agent uncertain.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter documentation, the description should explain return values, section meanings, and usage context. It provides none of this, leaving the agent with insufficient information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema has one parameter 'section' with enum values and default 'all', but schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention this parameter, explain the enum values, or clarify how to use it. With low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 'Get current configuration values' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (configuration values). The tool name reinforces this. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'inventory-status' or 'list-environments' which might also retrieve state information.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools exist that might overlap in purpose, but the description offers no differentiation.

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