Get Search Scopes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety and idempotency aspects. The description adds the context that it returns 'Org-independent metadata' and provides examples, but does not significantly expand beyond what annotations convey.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundant or extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose.

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 low complexity (no required parameters, no output schema, simple listing action), the description provides adequate context: it names the output (scope options), explains it's org-independent metadata, and gives examples. The only minor gap is not addressing the optional output_format parameter, but its default value mitigates the need for a full explanation.

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?

The input schema has one parameter (output_format) with zero description coverage. The tool description does not mention the parameter at all, leaving the agent without guidance on its purpose or allowed values beyond the schema's type and default.

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 lists available device-search scope options, gives concrete examples (device, group, org), and specifically ties it to the Advanced Device Search API, which distinguishes it from other search-related siblings like get_searchable_fields or advanced_device_search.

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 implies usage for discovering available scopes but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The context of 'Org-independent metadata' hints at a configuration/introspection role.

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