list_acls

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the environment requirement 'SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true', which is beyond the annotations. It also clarifies the scope of ACLs (read/write/create/delete) but does not introduce any contradiction.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that starts with the action 'List Access Control rules (ACLs)' and appends a required condition in parentheses. It contains no redundant information.

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 read-only list operation with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers its purpose, the meaning of ACLs, and an important prerequisite. It does not include pagination or ordering details, but those are not essential for this simple tool.

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 covers all four parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. The baseline of 3 applies; the description does not elaborate on limit, table, active, or operation.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'Access Control rules (ACLs)', further clarifying with 'who can read/write/create/delete records'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_acl, create_acl, and update_acl.

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 provides clear context that this tool lists ACLs and notes a prerequisite ('requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true'), giving some usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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