list_regulars

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

With no annotations, the description clarifies that regulars are trusted users exempt from spam filters. It implies a read-only operation, which is sufficient for this simple list tool.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and meaning of 'regulars' without any 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 parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose and what regulars are, which is all that's needed.

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 no parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description doesn't need to add parameter information; baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 it lists regulars and explains the concept (trusted users exempt from spam filters). It uses specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like add_regular and remove_regular.

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 usage for viewing regulars, and the lack of parameters makes context clear. No explicit exclusions or alternatives, but sibling names provide differentiation.

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