show_config

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

Description states it returns configuration, implying no side effects, but does not explicitly declare non-destructive behavior. With no annotations, the description is adequate but could be clearer about lack of mutation.

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?

Single sentence, directly front-loaded with the action and output. No wasted words.

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 config retrieval tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It specifies what is returned (resolved config and path) and the purpose (debugging).

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?

No parameters defined, so schema covers everything. Description adds context about returning resolved config and path, which is sufficient for this zero-parameter tool.

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 it returns the resolved configuration and config file path. 'Return' and 'for debugging' specify the exact output and purpose. The tool is distinct from siblings like 'check' or 'proxy_info'.

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 or avoid. The description implies debugging use but does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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