list_load_balancers

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false, and idempotentHint true. The description adds behavioral clarity that the listing spans 'all accounts and regions', which is a key constraint beyond annotations. However, it doesn't clarify pagination or ordering 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?

Single sentence, 12 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word adds value; no filler.

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 simple list tool with one required parameter, good annotations, and no output schema (common for list endpoints), the description is suitably complete. It covers scope (all accounts and regions) and the essential parameter. Could mention if results are filterable by region or account explicitly, but not required for minimal completeness.

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 already provides description for the single required parameter 'application', achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description starts with 'List' verb and specifies the resource 'load balancers', scoped to 'a Spinnaker application across all accounts and regions'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_clusters or list_firewalls.

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 use when needing a list of load balancers for an application, but provides no guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools (e.g., get_firewall for specific security groups). No exclusion criteria.

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