list_terminals

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and the optional filters are mentioned, but nothing is disclosed about pagination, ordering, authorization, or failure modes. The safety profile is only inferred from the verb.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence conveys the operation and filters with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple signature.

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 enough to understand the basic list operation and optional filters, and an output schema covers return values. However, with no annotations and no usage or behavioral context, an agent still lacks guidance on pagination/ordering and how this tool relates to get_terminal.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to explain branch_code and status. It names both filter dimensions but does not clarify what values are valid, how branch_code should be sourced, or the meaning of each status, leaving the agent to infer from the schema's enum and naming.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('terminals') and names the two optional filtering dimensions. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_terminal (single terminal retrieval) and list_branches (different resource).

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 gives no when-to-use guidance or alternatives; it only states what the tool does and that filters are optional. It does not say to prefer get_terminal for a single terminal or explain when branch/status filtering is appropriate.

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