telivy_list_risk_assessment_devices

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden itself. It clearly indicates a read-only enumeration operation, but it does not disclose details such as pagination, return shape, or whether 'deep-scan devices' implies any filtering. There is no contradiction or misleading side-effect information.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to identifying the action, target, and scope.

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 operation, the description plus schema are largely sufficient. There is no output schema, but the return concept ('devices') is implied by the description; additional detail about pagination or the meaning of 'deep-scan' would improve completeness but is not critical for basic invocation.

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 input schema fully describes the single parameter 'id' as an 'Assessment UUID' (100% schema description coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, matching the baseline for complete schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('deep-scan devices for a risk assessment'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like telivy_get_risk_assessment_device (single device) and telivy_list_risk_assessments (list assessments). The scope is explicit: all devices for a particular assessment.

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 phrase 'for a risk assessment' implies the intended context of calling with an assessment UUID, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over related tools or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving usage guidance mostly inferential.

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