gen_list_providers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. The word 'List' reasonably conveys a read-only operation and the scope is stated, but it does not disclose prerequisites, whether external provider services are contacted, or whether any state is read beyond configured providers.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-sentence purpose, a useful KB reference, and a concrete example. There is no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.

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?

This is a simple list operation with an output schema and a KB pointer, so the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits clear parameter behavior and usage context, which are meaningful gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain include_import_helpers. The example shows include_import_helpers=True and connects it to 'import helper readiness', but it never clarifies what False does or how the flag changes the returned data, leaving the agent to guess from the parameter name.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List configured generative providers and D.1 import helper readiness.' It clearly says what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling gen_* config tools like gen_get_provider_config.

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 example invocation and KB reference imply how to use the tool, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. The agent must infer the appropriate context from the name and example.

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