cleanuparr_list_notification_providers

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a read operation. The description adds a valuable behavioral disclosure: 'Secret fields may be redacted by Cleanuparr,' which sets expectations about the response and is not present in the annotation.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('List notification providers') and immediately followed by a relevant caveat. It contains no filler or redundancy.

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 no parameters, a read-only annotation, and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and key behavioral nuance (redaction). It lacks elaboration on the structure of returned providers, but the output schema likely covers that, making the description complete enough for selection and invocation.

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 input schema is an empty object, so there is no parameter-specific meaning to add. The description correctly omits parameter discussion, and the schema fully covers the interface.

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 'List notification providers.' with a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the action and object. It distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools for notification providers (e.g., create, update, delete) and other list tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios like checking configured providers before testing or updating, nor does it exclude cases 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.