list_agents

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

With no annotations provided, the description explicitly states 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral disclosure. It also communicates that it returns agent_id for downstream assignment, though it does not detail pagination or exact filtering behavior.

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 three short, purposeful clauses with no filler. It front-loads the action and adds read-only and downstream-use information without redundancy.

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 two-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the main invocation details: resource, optional filters, read-only safety, and the expected agent_id. Minor details like response shape or pagination are not stated, but they are not critical for correct selection.

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 must compensate. 'Optionally filtered by name/role' adds meaning to the two params, but matching semantics and format are left unspecified.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('team agents') and clarifies the optional filters by name/role. It also distinguishes the tool's output by noting it provides agent_id for assign_agent, which separates it from generic list and read tools.

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?

The line 'Provides agent_id for assign_agent' gives a clear downstream use case, telling an agent when this tool is needed. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or when-not cases, but the context is sufficient for selection.

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