list_active_conferences

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses key behaviors: returns empty list if nothing in progress, pagination behavior (limit/offset ignored when fetch_all is true), and fetch_all returning up to 5,000 records. This adds significant value and no contradictions.

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 efficient and well-structured: a one-line summary followed by a bulleted argument list. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information. The structure is front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 (6 parameters, pagination) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns (empty list if none), parameter usage, and pagination behavior. No gaps remain, making it fully self-contained for correct invocation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose: name filter by exact instance name, service_type with enumerated values, tag filter, and pagination control (limit, offset, fetch_all). It clarifies the interaction between limit/offset and fetch_all, which the schema alone does not convey.

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 it lists currently-running conference instances, using the specific verb 'list' and resource 'active conferences'. The title further reinforces this. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_active_participants or list_alarms, which target different resources.

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 provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_conference_shard or list_history_conferences). While the context implies it's for active conferences, there is no mention of when not to use it or conditions for preferring siblings.

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