wacta_list_ctas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only list operation and adds value by mentioning the plan cap and slug identity, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or describe return 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 two concise sentences that convey the tool's purpose, scope, and relevant details without fluff. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Lista' and provides necessary qualifications in a compact form.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters, output schema, or annotations. The description covers what it lists, the source, plan cap, and identity, but it could mention the return format or whether full objects are returned. Overall, it is reasonably complete for a list operation.

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 tool has no parameters, and the schema is empty. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description correctly avoids unnecessary parameter explanations. No additional semantics are needed.

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 the tool lists CTAs from the 'Registro Único' with the plan cap and specifies that each CTA's identity is its slug. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wacta_save_cta and wacta_delete_cta, which perform different actions.

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 the tool is for listing CTAs, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The context of the listing and plan cap is clear, but there is no direct guidance on selecting this tool versus others.

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