cf_marketplace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation but says nothing about auth requirements, whether results are scoped to the current target, pagination, or output format.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately terse for a simple list tool, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than tight structure.

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 one-optional-param read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps: the dual list/lookup behavior of the 'service' param and any auth or target-scoping context are unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the 'service' parameter and its optionality are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds no extra meaning and in fact glosses over the notable behavior change: supplying 'service' converts a listing call into a single-service lookup.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('available services in the marketplace'), so an agent can grasp the intent immediately. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling 'cf_services' or 'cf_service', which likely cover overlapping service-listing territory.

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 on when to use this versus cf_services or cf_service, and no mention of prerequisites such as being logged in or targeted at an org/space. The context is only loosely implied by the tool name.

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