list_queues

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature, ordering, defaults, and crucially the truncation semantics ('do not treat this as the complete set'). This is valuable beyond simple read/write hints, though it doesn't describe the fields of each queue item.

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and organized into args and return envelope sections. Every sentence adds meaningful information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 output schema, the description provides a return envelope and truncation caveat, which is sufficient for a list tool with two optional parameters. It does not enumerate queue object fields, but that is not critical for correct invocation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, both parameters (vhost, target) are fully explained with their meanings, defaults, and omit behavior. This fully compensates for the bare schema and helps the agent pass correct arguments.

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 lists queues, optionally restricted to one vhost, ordered by deepest backlog first. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like queue_detail (single queue) or queue_overview.

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?

Provides clear context on how to invoke: optionally restrict to a vhost, omit for all; explains default vhost and target. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but for a listing tool the usage is well implied.

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