Get Search Scopes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint as true/false. The description adds value by specifying the result is 'org-independent metadata' about scopes, which aligns with and contextualizes the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The structure is optimal for a simple informational tool.

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's simplicity (1 optional param, no required params, exists output schema), the description adequately covers its purpose and behavior. An agent can correctly decide to invoke it for retrieving search scope metadata.

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 description does not mention the single optional parameter 'output_format' despite 0% schema description coverage. While the parameter is simple with a default, the description should at least hint at possible format options to aid the agent.

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 it lists available device-search scope options, with the specific verb 'List' and resource 'device-search scope options'. The mention of 'org-independent metadata' adds clarity and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_searchable_fields'.

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 obtaining scope options to use in Advanced Device Search, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. It is clear but lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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