get_value

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get' implies a read operation, but doesn't cover permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a configuration tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. However, it's under-specified rather than concise—it lacks necessary details for effective use, which slightly reduces its utility despite the clean structure.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It doesn't clarify the tool's scope (e.g., vs. 'get_config'), parameter usage, or behavioral aspects, making it inadequate for a tool in this context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, with two required parameters ('section' and 'option') undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names, failing to explain what 'section' and 'option' refer to, their expected formats, or examples. This doesn't compensate for the coverage gap.

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 a specific option from configuration' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('option from configuration'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_config' or 'get_variable', which also retrieve configuration-related data, leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific tool.

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. With sibling tools like 'get_config' (likely for broader configuration) and 'get_variable' (for variables), the description offers no context on usage scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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