list_agents

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

The description discloses the ordering behavior but lacks other important behavioral details such as read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or access control. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and is insufficient.

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 brief but contains repetition—the second sentence essentially restates the first. It is not overly long but wastes space; a single sentence would be more concise.

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?

For a simple list-all tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and ordering. However, it lacks context about scope (e.g., user-specific vs. global) and does not clarify how it differs from 'find_agents'.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary detail about parameters.

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 'Return every pooled agent' with a specific verb and resource, and includes the ordering 'most-recently-updated first', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'find_agents' that likely support filtering.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'find_agents' or 'list_agent_runs'. The description implies it returns all agents without filters, but does not explicitly state use cases or exclusions.

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