ListTransports

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

The description includes a '[read-only]' hint indicating non-destructive behavior, but no annotations are provided to reinforce this. It lacks details on response format, pagination, authentication, rate limits, or error handling. The description carries the full behavioral burden and does not fully disclose traits.

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 with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the read-only hint and efficiently conveys the core purpose and scope.

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 low complexity, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be improved by mentioning the return structure or fields. It tells what the tool returns (transport requests) but not their attributes.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are described in the schema. The description adds marginal value by linking the returned transports (modifiable/released) to the modifiable_only parameter, but does not provide new meaning beyond the 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 verb (list) and resource (transport requests) and specifies scope (for current or specified user, modifiable/released, workbench/customizing). It distinguishes well from sibling create/update/delete tools but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like GetTransport.

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?

Implied usage context (listing transports for a user) but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. No guidance on when not to use this tool or mention of sibling tools like GetTransport.

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