list_integration_packages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only mentions listing with optional OData query, but does not disclose side effects (none expected), authentication needs, or whether pagination is supported. For a read-only list tool, the description fails to confirm safety or constraints.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no redundant information. Every word is necessary.

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 has an output schema (not shown), return values are covered. However, the description lacks details on pagination, filtering beyond OData, or ordering. For a tool with many siblings, it could be more complete regarding scope (e.g., workspace scope is mentioned) but still minimal.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds a minimal example of the OData query format ('$select=Id,Name&$top=10'), providing some value beyond the bare schema. However, it does not explain allowed operators or syntax, leaving ambiguity.

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 integration packages in the Design workspace', using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('integration packages'), distinguishing it from siblings that get single packages or list iflows.

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 implies usage by showing an optional OData query parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_integration_package' or 'list_package_iflows'. Lacks when-not and exclusion guidance.

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