wisdom_list_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The bare phrase 'List known agents' reveals nothing about pagination behavior, result ordering, authentication requirements, or whether the result reflects a local registry vs a remote source. The only behavioral signal is the read-only nature implied by the verb 'List.'

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?

Three words with zero filler, and the core verb+resource is front-loaded. However, this borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness — the sentence is too thin to convey meaning beyond the tool name itself.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify what 'known agents' means and note pagination behavior, but it does neither. The minimum viable description for a list tool would at least mention what collection is being listed and how results are returned.

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 100% — both 'limit' and 'cursor' are fully documented in the schema, including the default for limit. The description adds no parameter information, but per baseline rules this is acceptable when the schema carries the full load.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('known agents'), and the resource name clearly differentiates it from sibling listing tools like wisdom_list_fragments, wisdom_list_tags, and wisdom_list_projects. However, the qualifier 'known' is ambiguous — it doesn't clarify whether these are locally registered agents, trusted agents, or some other subset.

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 guidance is provided at all. The description doesn't explain when to use this tool vs the closely related sibling wisdom_get_agent (retrieve a single agent), nor does it differentiate from the other list tools. An agent must infer entirely from the tool name which tool fits the task.

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