List AutoDMs and comment auto-replies

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

Annotations already declare this is a read-only, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing the default active-only filtering and the fields returned.

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 with no wasted text. The resource and default filtering behavior are front-loaded, and the parameter exception is stated immediately after.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with annotations and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what is listed, the default filter, the override parameter, and the key returned fields.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by stating the inverse default (active ones only) and clarifying exactly when include_inactive changes that behavior.

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 and resource: list the account's AutoDM and comment auto-reply monitors. It also names the returned fields (platform, state, counters), making it distinguishable from related tools like get_autodm_logs and manage_autodms.

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 defines the default behavior: active monitors only unless include_inactive is true. This gives clear context for when to use the parameter, though it does not explicitly route the agent away from sibling tools such as get_autodm_logs.

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