List Devices for Policies

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds 'Read-only' confirming no mutations and 'blast-radius assessment' explaining query intent. 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?

Extremely concise single sentence with dash separation. Every word earns its place. Front-loaded with action and resource.

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 no output schema, low parameter coverage, but simple tool. Description covers purpose, usage context, and read-only nature. Could mention output format options, but still complete enough for an agent.

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 0% schema description coverage, description adds meaning for 'policies' parameter (by UUID) but does not explain 'output_format' parameter. Partial compensation, but still leaves gaps.

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?

Clearly states verb (List), resource (devices targeted by policies), and scope (by UUID). Distinguishes from sibling action tools like apply_policy_changes and execute_policy_now by specifying 'blast-radius assessment' purpose.

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?

Explicitly states usage context: 'before executing or changing a policy.' Implies blast-radius assessment use case, but does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternative tools.

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