list_agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly confirm safety, mention pagination behavior, or describe the return format. No additional context is provided about potential side effects or permissions.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the core action and the optional filter. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 listing tool, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details about pagination parameters, return structure, or any prerequisites. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, a bit more context (e.g., 'returns a paginated list of agents') would improve completeness.

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 coverage is low (33%), with only group_id having a description. The description explicitly mentions group filtering, which aligns with group_id, but page and per_page remain undocumented, forcing the agent to infer their purpose. The description does not fully compensate for the low schema 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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'agents', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_tickets and list_groups. The optional filter by group adds a precise scope, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by group' implies a use case (listing agents with an optional group filter) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like list_contacts or list_groups. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, but the naming makes primary usage obvious.

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