List ChurchTools services

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

readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already establish the safety/world-access profile, lowering the bar. The description usefully adds what the operation actually returns (id, name, service group id, service group name) in the absence of an output schema; only missing auth/rate-limit context keeps it from a 5.

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 with zero filler: verb first, then the resource, then the returned fields. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and an explicit list of returned fields, the description is essentially sufficient without an output schema. It omits ordering/pagination behavior, a minor gap for a tool claiming to list every service.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline a 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The enumerated return fields are a bonus, but parameter semantics are not at issue here.

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?

States a specific verb (Lists) and resource (services) and disambiguates the overloaded domain term with concrete examples (sermon, sound), so an agent won't confuse it with ct_list_calendars or ct_list_events. It does not explicitly name a sibling/alternative, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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?

"Lists every service" weakly implies no filtering is available, but there is no statement of when to use this versus the sibling search/list tools, no prerequisites, and no note about ordering or pagination behavior. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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