Looker.Looks.List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List saved looks on the Looker instance' implies a read-only, unfiltered enumeration across the whole instance, which is useful behavioral context, but it says nothing about pagination, result caps, or whether permissions restrict which looks are visible.

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 short sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no filler. It is exactly as long as the tool warrants.

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?

With zero parameters, an output schema covering return values, and low complexity, the description supplies nearly everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. The only meaningful omission is whether results are paginated or truncated, which matters for an instance-wide listing.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. The description correctly implies no filtering arguments are accepted, matching the empty 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 gives a specific verb ('List') and resource ('saved looks') scoped to the Looker instance, which cleanly separates it from looker.dashboards.list and looker.look.run by resource type. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings, but the resource noun does the disambiguating work.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for enumerating looks, but there is no statement of when to prefer it over looker.look.run (which presumably needs a look ID) or looker.dashboards.list. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no named alternatives.

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