List TacticalRMM Scripts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description reinforces this by saying 'This tool is read-only and does not run scripts', adding the explicit constraint that no script execution occurs. However, it doesn't detail return format or pagination, which is a minor gap.

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?

Two concise sentences, no filler. The first sentence states the action and resource; the second clarifies safety, both earning their place.

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 tool is a simple read-only listing with 3 documented optional parameters and rich annotations. The description covers purpose and safety; combined with the schema, it gives an agent enough to select and invoke correctly. No output schema needed.

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 coverage is 100%; all three parameters (limit, offset, response_format) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'scripts from the TacticalRMM script library at /scripts/', providing clear scope. It explicitly distinguishes itself by stating it is read-only and does not run scripts, setting it apart from potential script execution 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives is provided. While it clarifies the tool's read-only nature, it doesn't mention related list tools (e.g., list_agents, list_tasks) or exclude cases. This leaves the selection criteria implicit.

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