list_intents

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses listing distinct intents and optional counts, but omits details like pagination, ordering, or performance. Adequate but not thorough for a list tool.

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 sentences only, front-loaded with key action, includes concrete examples. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 (2 optional params) and existence of output schema, the description covers core functionality well. Could mention output schema for completeness, but not essential.

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, the description compensates fully. It explains 'category' as optional restriction and 'with_counts' for distribution, giving concrete examples (e.g., 'ACCOUNT category', 'get_refund'). Adds meaning beyond schema.

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 'List the distinct intents' with an optional restriction by category. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning discovery of valid intent names and distribution queries, fulfilling a specific verb+resource+scope.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: to discover valid intent names and to get distribution with counts. Examples clarify context. Missing explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, but the sibling list hints at other tools.

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