list_guardrails

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) already cover safety traits. The description adds no new behavioral details beyond stating it lists guardrails with optional filters, which is consistent but not additional disclosure. Moderate value.

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 efficient sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose and fields, the second provides usage guidance. Clearly front-loaded.

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 comprehensive annotations, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It specifies output fields, filters, and usage pattern, leaving no essential gaps.

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% with all parameter descriptions provided. The description mentions optional workspace/org filters but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already conveys. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List guardrails in the org' and mentions specific fields (id, slug, status, ownership) and optional filters. It distinguishes from siblings by advising use before get, update, or delete operations.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Use this to find IDs and slugs before get_guardrail, update_guardrail, or delete_guardrail,' providing clear when-to-use guidance and implicit when-not-to-use (when you need a single guardrail, use get_guardrail).

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