xsiam_list_operations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool returns a catalog grouped by category and includes tool names and summaries, which is informative. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state 'no side effects' or mention any access requirements. For a simple discovery tool, this is adequate, though explicit non-destructiveness would be better.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the key term 'Discovery tool,' and every sentence adds value. The first sentence states what it returns, and the second gives usage guidance and mentions filtering. There is no redundancy or wasted words.

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 (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough. It describes the return content (names and summaries) and the grouping/filtering behavior. It does not mention error handling or permissions, but for a discovery tool, these are less critical. The description covers all necessary contextual information for an agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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 input schema already provides a detailed description of the 'tag' parameter, including case-insensitivity and examples. The tool description simply repeats 'Optionally filter by a tag substring,' adding no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description does not exceed that baseline.

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's purpose: it is a 'Discovery tool' that returns the catalog of all available XSIAM operations, grouped by category, with each tool's name and summary. This is a specific verb+resource combination (returns catalog) and differentiates it from the sibling tools, which are actual 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?

The description explicitly directs users to 'Use this to find the right tool before calling it,' which is clear guidance on when to use this tool. It also mentions the optional filtering capability, giving context for narrowing the search. This effectively tells the agent to use it as a discovery mechanism prior to invoking other operations.

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