list_systems

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It unambiguously states 'Read-only; no side effects,' which is a critical behavioral trait. It also explains the version guard, adding context beyond what the schema provides.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then read-only status, then context and usage. Each sentence adds necessary information without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it lists, when to use it, side effects, and the parameter's role. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, but the description explicitly addresses the one parameter with 'Takes no arguments beyond the version guard.' This adds semantic meaning to server_version as a version guard, though it doesn't elaborate on format or valid values, so not a perfect 5.

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 opens with 'List all saved systems in the current workspace,' which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing get_system, get_system_risk_view, and create_system, making its role clear.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to discover system ids (e.g. before get_system or get_system_risk_view)' and directs creation to create_system. This provides clear context and alternatives, satisfying the dimension fully.

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