Google api list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that returned entries carry default versions, but 'generic plane' is unexplained jargon and nothing is said about catalog size, freshness, or whether the list is filtered by enabled APIs.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The only weakness is that it spends its few words on the opaque term 'generic plane' rather than a clarifying phrase an agent could act on.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the parameter surface is trivial. Still, as the entry point to a google.api.* family (methods, describe, read, call, rollback), the description should hint at the discovery workflow; it does not, leaving an agent to infer how to chain from a listed API to a call.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument, full-catalog enumeration without contradicting the empty input 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 names a concrete verb+resource: it enumerates Google APIs available through the generic plane along with their default versions. An agent can tell this is a discovery/catalog listing. It does not, however, distinguish itself from near-siblings like google.api.methods or google.api.describe, leaving the fleet of google.api.* tools ambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of google.api.methods, google.api.describe, or google.api.read. The phrase 'reachable through the generic plane' implies a discovery-first workflow but never states it, and no preconditions or follow-up steps are given.

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