listSTTProviders

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. It says 'Retrieve all' which restates the readOnlyHint. There is no mention of response format, pagination, rate limits, or what the 'all' list contains. The openWorldHint=false is not explained. Given annotations already declare read-only, the description contributes little.

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 front-loaded with the main action in the first sentence. The parenthetical tag '(Tags: Providers)' is arguably unnecessary but does not distract. It is appropriately sized for a trivial tool.

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 simple no-parameter read-only list, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not indicate the shape of the response (e.g., array of provider objects with ids/names) or any behavior like sorting or empty results. With no output schema, this information would be helpful. But given the simplicity, a score of 3 is reasonable.

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 zero parameters, there is nothing for the description to clarify. The schema is trivially complete (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter info but none is needed. Baseline is 4.

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 the specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource as 'Speech-to-Text providers', distinguishing it from sibling tools like listLLMProviders and listTTSProviders. The meaning is unambiguous, though it does not mention alternatives.

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 usage context or alternatives are provided. The description simply states what it does with no guidance on when to prefer this over listAllProviders or other provider lists. For a tool with no parameters, there is also no mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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