List Kong consumers

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

Annotations already carry readOnly/ idempotent/ non-destructive/ openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: it discloses the return shape, and the LIMITATIONS line states that credentials and group membership are not included, pointing to get_consumer instead. It stops short of pagination behavior or how to obtain nextCursor, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Four labeled sections (statement, USE WHEN, RETURNS, LIMITATIONS) that are front-loaded and tightly worded. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by naming the returned fields (items with ref, username, customId, plus page) and its exclusions. For a two-parameter read-only list tool this is fully sufficient to invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both limit and cursor are already fully documented in the schema (including the cursor-opacity warning). The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource (lists Kong consumers, with '(API clients)' clarifying the domain term), and implicitly distinguishes itself from get_consumer by framing itself as the discovery step before it.

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?

Explicit USE WHEN clause covering both finding a consumer name and confirming existence, plus a clear handoff to get_consumer for single-consumer detail. It also distinguishes a missing consumer from a missing credential, which is a real routing decision.

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