kaiten_list_sd_sla

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-style operation via the word 'List' but discloses nothing about pagination defaults, response shape, filtering, scoping, or access requirements. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a meaningful gap, even if the operation is simple.

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 seven-word sentence, front-loaded with the verb, with zero filler. Every word earns its place; there is nothing to trim or reorganize.

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 low-complexity read tool with only 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the definition is minimally viable but spare. Without an output schema or annotations, a brief indication of what the returned SLA policies look like or how pagination behaves would round it out, though the operation is simple enough that an agent can infer standard list semantics.

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% — both 'limit' (Max results) and 'offset' (Pagination offset) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond those schema descriptions, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb 'List' + resource 'Service Desk SLA policies', making the operation unambiguous. The verb distinguishes it from mutate siblings like kaiten_create_sd_sla, kaiten_update_sd_sla, kaiten_delete_sd_sla, and from single-item retrieval (kaiten_get_sd_sla). Minor deduction: it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, but the collection-vs-single distinction is inferable from the name.

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 tool versus alternatives such as kaiten_get_sd_sla for a specific policy, or how SD SLA policies relate to kaiten_list_sd_requests/kaiten_list_sd_services. The limit/offset parameters imply a paginated listing use case, but no context about selection criteria or prerequisites is given.

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