list_bots

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description focuses on behavioral traits like field selection presets and filtering options. It adds useful context beyond annotations, though it omits details like pagination behavior.

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 concise with two sentences: the first states the core purpose with bot types, and the second lists additional features. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant information.

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 complexity (5 parameters, output schema present), the description covers the main aspects: bot type filtering, field selection, status and context filters. It does not mention pagination or sorting, but these are documented in the schema, so completeness is adequate.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the role of botType, fields, and filters, grouping them into a coherent purpose. The page parameter is only implied through its schema, but overall the description compensates well.

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 'List bots by type (DCA, Combo, or Grid)', using a specific verb and resource. It highlights key capabilities like field selection presets and filtering by status and paper/real context, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_bot or list_deals.

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 implies usage through its name and mention of bot types and filters, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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