list_diagnostics

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe, read-only operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., response format, scope of 'basis', or any side effects), thus providing no value beyond the 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no extraneous words. It front-loades the verb and resource, making it immediately actionable. Every word 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?

Given the tool has no parameters, has an output schema to describe return values, and is simple, the description is mostly adequate. However, it could briefly clarify what 'diagnostic basis' means to avoid ambiguity, but the presence of the output schema compensates.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the input schema is already fully defined. The description does not need to explain parameters. Following guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for parameterless tools.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'diagnostic basis', indicating a retrieval operation. It is distinguishable from siblings like 'register_diagnostic' (creation) and 'list_interventions' (different resource). However, the term 'diagnostic basis' is somewhat vague and could be more precise.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_interventions' or 'list_problems'. It lacks any mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without decision support.

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