bowire.mock.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does disclose the payload contents (handle, port, connect URL), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, whether output is paginated/limited, or what happens when no mocks are running. For a zero-parameter read-only listing the risk is low, so this is adequate rather than rich.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler. The scope qualifier ('currently running', 'spawned via bowire.mock.start') is front-loaded before the return-value detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the fields each mock entry carries (handle, port, connect URL), which is exactly the compensation needed. It omits edge cases (empty list, whether stopped mocks linger), so it is nearly but not fully complete for such a simple tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless schema applies. The description correctly does not invent parameter-like filters such as port or handle selectors.

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+resource ('List currently running mock servers') and scopes it to mocks 'spawned via bowire.mock.start', which cleanly separates it from bowire.mock.start, bowire.mock.stop, and the other list tools in the family.

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 reference to bowire.mock.start gives clear situational context: use this to inspect mocks you previously started. It does not, however, state any when-not condition or name an alternative tool for a different inspection need, so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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