list_services

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

The description does not contradict the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) and adds parameter details. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations already imply, such as potential pagination or rate limits.

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 highly concise: one sentence for the purpose, a bulleted arg list, and a returns line. No unnecessary words, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown but mentioned), the description adequately covers the tool's operation. It explains the return as a list of services, which is sufficient for a simple query tool.

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 description adds clear meaning to all three parameters: 'query' filters by name, 'teams_ids' filters by team IDs, and 'limit' caps results. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'List all services' with optional filtering parameters, making the tool's purpose explicit. The name 'list_services' directly reflects the action, and it is distinguished from sibling tools like 'list_business_services' or 'list_teams'.

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 explains what the tool does and lists parameters, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_service' for a single service or other list tools. It lacks explicit usage context.

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