list_registry

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and pays it off: it clearly discloses the lack of trust/verified gating, warns that results may include unverified agents, and states that trust_score/verified/flags are already included in results. This gives the agent crucial behavioral context for a registry listing tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then adds meaningful usage guidance and parameter details. Every sentence earns its place—there is no fluff or repetition, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description tells the agent what to expect in results (trust_score/verified/flags) and covers pagination behavior. The tool is simple (2 optional params), and the description fully equips an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Although the schema has no descriptions, this description fully documents both parameters: limit has max 200 and default 50, offset skips agents for pagination with default 0. This goes well beyond the bare schema and fully compensates for the 0% coverage.

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 the tool browses all agents in the Aidress registry with pagination. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly contrasting with match_agents for capability-filtered discovery and by explaining that verify_agent is unnecessary for results.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool (browsing the full registry or building an index) and when not to (use match_agents for capability-filtered discovery). It also tells the agent that verify_agent is not needed on list results, which prevents unnecessary calls.

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