list_agents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool returns a summary per agent and that full configuration requires get_agent, which is useful. However, it does not clarify the behavior of the 'limit' parameter or pagination, and the phrase 'List all' may mislead given a default limit of 20.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the purpose, the second paragraph gives concrete use cases, and the third explains the output and directs to get_agent. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no redundancy.

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 mostly complete for a simple list tool, covering purpose, use cases, and relationship to get_agent. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the description omits any mention of the 'limit' parameter or pagination behavior, which is a notable gap for effective use.

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% for the single 'limit' parameter, and the description does not mention or explain this parameter at all. Since the description must compensate when schema coverage is low, this is a significant gap. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no value for parameter understanding.

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 a clear, specific statement: 'List all voice AI agents in your organization.' It explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by noting it returns summaries and directing users to get_agent for full configuration, which distinguishes it from get_agent and other agent-related tools.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: to find agent IDs for making calls, starting campaigns, or assigning to phone numbers, and to audit agent existence/activity. It also provides an alternative by recommending get_agent for full configuration, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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