list_printers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that the tool may return multiple results requiring user input, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not thorough.

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: two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it states the purpose and provides a usage hint. It could briefly mention the return format or fields, but given the simplicity, this is sufficient.

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?

There are no parameters (input schema empty, schema description coverage 100%). With zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed.

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 'personal Polar Cloud printers', which is specific and distinguishes from the sibling 'list_school_printers' that handles school printers.

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 gives a clear usage hint: 'If more than one, ask the user which serial_number to use.' This implies the tool returns a list requiring disambiguation. It implicitly distinguishes from 'list_school_printers' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives.

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