list_rest_message_functions

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes the tool as a safe read operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as pagination behavior, ordering, or return structure. It is consistent with annotations but does not go beyond them.

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, concise sentence that directly states the purpose without any filler or redundancy. It is perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 list tool with strong schema and annotations, the description is nearly complete. It defines the tool's purpose without explaining return values, which is acceptable given the output is an implied list. Some mention of returned fields or default behavior could push it to a 5, but nothing critical is missing.

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%, with both 'rest_message_sys_id' and 'limit' already described clearly in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific resource ('HTTP methods/functions defined within a REST Message'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_rest_messages' and 'get_rest_message'. It unambiguously states what the tool returns.

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 the tool is used when you need the HTTP methods/functions belonging to a specific REST Message, requiring the parent sys_id. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer usage without confusion.

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