aps_list_hubs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implicitly indicates a read operation but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or safe. Appropriate for a list tool but lacks explicit safety disclaimer.

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 concise sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and result details, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 no parameters or output schema, the description is fully complete for this simple list operation. It describes input (none needed), output (summary fields), and next steps.

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 has zero parameters, so coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining the output structure and downstream use, which is relevant context for invoking the 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists ACC/BIM 360 hubs (accounts), specifies returned fields (name, id, type, region), and explains how the result is used (hub id in aps_list_projects). It distinctively identifies the resource and purpose.

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 instructs to use the returned hub id in subsequent calls to aps_list_projects, providing clear context on when to use this tool as an entry point. No alternatives needed as it's the primary hub lister.

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