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

Annotations cover read-only safety; the description adds that results include each queue's state and messaging stats, and identifies the underlying GET endpoint. It still omits pagination and auth details, but adds meaningful context beyond annotations.

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 tight sentences, leading with the action and resource, then the API endpoint. No redundant or filler text.

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 one-param read tool with annotations and full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It omits return structure and pagination, but no output schema exists and annotations already handle safety.

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 coverage is 100% and app_id is documented in the schema as coming from ably_list_apps. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 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 the verb 'List' and the specific resource 'Ably Queues (AMQP/STOMP message queues)' scoped to an app, plus the Control API endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ably_list_apps or ably_list_channels.

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?

Implies usage by naming the resource and app scope, but does not state when to choose this tool over other list tools or any prerequisites beyond app_id. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are given.

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