move_list_rigs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description is consistent with them. It adds useful account-scoping context, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as permissions, limits, or result characteristics; the output schema covers the return structure.

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?

One sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema and annotations, this description is fully adequate. An agent knows exactly what resource is listed and the account scope.

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 has no parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description carries no parameter documentation burden. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('skeleton rigs'), and a scope ('available to this account'). This resource is distinct from sibling list tools such as move_list_takes, move_list_jobs, and move_list_volumes.

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 intended use is implied by the resource and scope, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. An agent can infer it should be used when account-available skeleton rigs are needed.

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