list_admin_profiles

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

The description discloses basic behavior (listing) but omits important traits. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral cues. It does not specify whether the operation is read-only, what data integrity implications exist, or if authorization is required. The word 'list' implies read-only, but explicit confirmation is absent.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core function with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 lack of output schema and the simplicity of the tool, the description could have hinted at the return format or provided context about what constitutes an 'administrator profile' versus users in 'list_users'. Without this, an agent may not fully understand the tool's output or scope.

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 coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds no parameter information, but the baseline for high coverage is 3. The description could have clarified that no parameters are needed, but it is not strictly necessary.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: listing administrator profiles and their permissions. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('administrator profiles'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_users' that list different entities. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar list tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where other tools might be more appropriate. An agent would need to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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