get_lambda_overview

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 discloses that environment variable values are never returned, only key names, and that it returns trigger event shapes. This is good for a read-only listing tool, though it could mention potential pagination or scope.

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 sentences, both packed with useful information. The first sentence lists returned fields, the second provides usage guidance. No wasted words.

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 output schema and no parameters, the description is quite detailed. It covers what data is returned and gives two concrete use cases. Could mention handling of large result sets or pagination, but overall 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 zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description adds no parameter information since none exist. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add anything further.

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 tool returns all Lambda functions with specific details (runtime, memory, timeout, env var keys, event triggers). It uses a specific verb 'returns' and resource 'all Lambda functions', and distinguishes from sibling tool 'analyze_function' by mentioning a use case without calling that tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this when auditing Lambda configuration for default memory (128 MB) or high timeouts, or when you need the trigger event shape for a specific function without running analyze_function.' This provides clear when-to-use and an alternative, leaving no ambiguity.

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