list_clients

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

The description indicates a read-only operation (listing clients), which is appropriate. However, it does not disclose any potential limitations such as pagination, permission requirements, or impact on the server. With no annotations, the description could be more explicit about the behavior.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 no output schema, the description does not clarify what information is returned for each client (e.g., name, ID, IP). For a complete understanding, the agent might need more context about the response format or any default sorting.

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 input schema has no parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The schema coverage is 100%, and the description aligns with the tool's purpose. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for zero 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 the action ('list') and the resource ('all clients connected to the server'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_clients' which implies filtering, and 'client_info_detailed' which provides details for a single client.

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 like 'search_clients' for filtered results or 'client_info_detailed' for a specific client. The description lacks any context for selection.

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