replica_list

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the '[READ]' prefix adds little. The description does add useful context by naming the replica state values returned, which matters because there is no output schema. It does not describe permissions, pagination, or ordering.

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?

Brevity is appropriate: a front-loaded classification tag, one sentence of purpose, and a compact args list. The '[READ]' tag is somewhat redundant with the annotation but does help scanability; otherwise every line earns its place.

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 three-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers all inputs and pre-empts the main unknown (what states come back). Missing only peripheral detail such as error behavior when the deployment name is unknown.

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%, so the description carries the full burden and does document all three parameters, including the non-obvious semantics of 'target' (from config, omitted for the default). It omits format/identifier details, but the top-level meaning of every parameter is covered.

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?

Clear verb+resource: lists replica states scoped to one deployment, and enumerates the possible states (running/starting/draining). It distinguishes itself from a global list by 'for one deployment,' though it does not explicitly position itself against siblings like deployment_status or drain_replica.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance. Nothing says whether this is for monitoring, pre-drain checks, or debugging, nor how it differs from deployment_status (status summary) or replica_restart (mutation). The only usage hint is 'omit for the default' on target.

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