list_quality_definitions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' and the explanatory clause convey that this returns the size-limit settings for each quality, which is useful, but it does not explicitly state the read-only nature, output shape, or any pagination/default behavior. It is adequate but not detailed.

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 that front-loads the action and resource, then adds a clarifying definition of what 'quality definitions' means in this context. Every word contributes meaning.

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 parameterless list operation with no output schema, the description is complete: it identifies what will be listed and explains the domain meaning of the listed objects. An agent can confidently invoke this tool without needing further clarification.

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 the schema has no properties, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The description correctly focuses on what is returned rather than input semantics, which is appropriate for a parameterless list operation.

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 states a specific action ('List') and resource ('quality definitions'), then clarifies exactly what that resource contains (size limits with min, max, preferred MB per minute). This clearly sets it apart from sibling tools like list_quality_profiles or update_quality_definitions.

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 clearly implies this is the read-only listing operation for quality definitions, and the sibling set includes update_quality_definitions as the mutation counterpart. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or mention scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate.

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