list_software_licenses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is known. The description adds a useful output detail ('compliance status') which is behavioral since there is no output schema, but it does not disclose pagination, filtering behavior, or result size limits beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states the action, target, and key output field. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 two optional parameters, full schema coverage, and readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description is adequate. It specifies the resource and key output attribute, and the schema handles the parameters. It could be more complete by differentiating from get_license_compliance, but that gap is largely covered by the purpose clarity dimension.

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 'limit' and 'query' described. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, but since the schema fully documents the parameters, the baseline 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 resource ('software license records') and adds the scope 'with compliance status,' distinguishing it from related tools like get_license_compliance and list_assets. It clearly conveys that this tool returns a list of license records enriched with compliance status.

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 use case—when you need to list software licenses and their compliance status—but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as get_license_compliance or list_assets. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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