labels_list_labels

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'List all labels via WS ...' without mentioning side effects, permissions, rate limits, or scope (e.g., system-wide). For a read-only list tool, minimal transparency is acceptable but does not add value beyond the function name.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose 'List all labels'.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and no parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what 'all labels' entails (e.g., system-wide, user-specific) and does not mention alternatives or scope. For a simple tool, this is acceptable but could be improved.

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 has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. With no parameters, the description adequately conveys that no input is required.

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 'List all labels' clearly states the action (list) and resource (labels), distinguishing it from other label tools like create, delete, or assign. Mentioning the WS endpoint adds technical context but does not detract from purpose clarity.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like labels_list_devices_with_label or labels_list_entities_with_label. However, the name and description imply it is for listing all labels, so usage context is implicit but not elaborated.

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