list_queues

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the output scope (queues with three metric types) and available filters, but does not mention pagination, rate limiting, default vhost behavior, or whether the list is complete. This is adequate for a simple read-only list, but not richly transparent.

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?

Two short sentences pack the core purpose and filtering capability without fluff. The main resource and output fields are front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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?

The description supplies the primary output fields and filtering options, which is sufficient for a simple list tool with fully documented optional parameters. There is no output schema and no mention of pagination or sorting behavior, but these are minor gaps for a read-only listing operation.

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%, so the parameter baseline is 3. The description's mention of filters by vhost and name pattern merely mirrors the schema's own parameter descriptions and adds no new semantic detail, and it omits the sortBy parameter entirely.

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 and resource: 'List queues' with the key included attributes: message depth, consumer count, and rates. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_exchanges, list_connections, or get_queue, and the filters are also stated.

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 implies this tool is for listing queues and filtering, but it does not explicitly guide the agent toward alternatives such as get_queue for single-queue detail or peek_messages for message content. The usage context is clear but no exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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