list_witnesses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds that it returns the full list of all witnesses, which is useful context, but it does not disclose potential response size or ordering behavior. Given the strong annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No wasted words; it 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with one optional, well-documented parameter, the description plus annotations provide sufficient context. It clearly states the return scope ('full list of all') but could potentially mention that the response might be large or that pagination is available via a sibling. This is a minor gap for an otherwise simple tool.

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 only parameter, 'network', is fully described in the schema ('Network name. Defaults to mainnet.'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies when schema coverage is 100%.

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 'Get' and explicitly states the resource: 'full list of all Super Representatives (SR / witnesses) on the network.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_paginated_witnesses by emphasizing 'full list', which implies this returns all witnesses rather than a paginated subset.

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 clear context: it returns the complete set of witnesses, implying use when the full list is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention the alternative get_paginated_witnesses for paginated access or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of explicit exclusion guidance.

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