List Key Value instances

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it calls GET /key-value on the Render Public API, which confirms the read-only nature and provides the HTTP method. This adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose and key behavior. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 description is complete enough given the rich input schema (100% coverage) and the fact that this is a straightforward list operation. While it does not describe the return format, the agent can infer that it returns a list of key-value objects, and the operation is simple. The annotations cover safety aspects.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., filter by name, region, etc.). It only generally mentions 'matching the provided filters', which adds no new semantics.

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 that the tool lists Key Value instances with optional filters, and falls back to listing all if no filters are provided. It specifies the API endpoint. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'retrieve' tool, though the verb 'list' vs 'retrieve' implies a collection vs single instance.

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 says 'if no filters are provided, all Key Value instances are returned', which implies the tool is for listing. It does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'retrieve_key_value' for a single instance, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context.

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