list_running_indi_drivers

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It states that the tool lists 'currently running' drivers, implying a read-only, safe operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm idempotency, lack of side effects, or authentication requirements, which is acceptable for a simple list tool but not highly transparent.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, earning its place completely.

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 (0 parameters, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It conveys everything needed to understand the tool's purpose and scope.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Per guidelines, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter info, which 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?

The description clearly states the action ('list') and the resource ('all currently running INDI drivers'). It distinctively sets this tool apart from siblings like 'list_indi_driver_catalog' (which lists available drivers) and 'list_indi_messages'.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where this tool is preferred, nor does it exclude cases where sibling tools are more appropriate.

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