Api stored libraries list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing actionable — pagination behavior, default page size, and what 'optimized data' actually changes in the payload are all unexplained.

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?

It is short, but brevity here is under-specification rather than conciseness. The single sentence is not front-loaded with purpose and wastes its budget on framework internals.

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, 17 undocumented optional parameters, and a description written for maintainers. An agent cannot form a correct call from this definition; it would have to guess which of the 17 filters exist and what they accept.

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?

17 parameters at 0% schema description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. Filters such as search, limit, offset, provider, packager, is_loaded, is_custom, object_type, filtering_labels, locale and version are completely undocumented anywhere.

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 sentence describes an internal implementation detail ('Override the list method to inject optimized data into the serializer context') rather than telling the agent what the tool returns. It never says it lists stored libraries, nor distinguishes it from siblings like ciso_assistant_api_loaded_libraries_list or ciso_assistant_api_mapping_libraries_list.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. Given dozens of sibling list endpoints, the agent is left to guess entirely from the name.

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