list_endpoints

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It adds one useful trait: 'Each call fetches the latest Swagger document,' which indicates freshness and potential network dependency. However, it does not mention read-only safety, error behavior, or output format, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. No unnecessary information or repetition, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool is simple (2 parameters, no output schema). The description states the purpose and adds a key behavioral note about fetching live Swagger docs. While it doesn't describe return types or error scenarios, these are less critical for a listing tool, making it sufficiently complete for its complexity.

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% for both parameters (tag and swagger_url). The description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the tool's function: 'List all API endpoints under the specified tag.' The verb 'list' and resource 'API endpoints' are specific, and the tag scoping distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tags (lists tags) and get_endpoint_detail (gets details for one endpoint).

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 by mentioning 'specified tag' but does not explicitly tell when to use this tool over alternatives or mention prerequisites (e.g., first call list_tags to get a valid tag). Sibling tool names provide context, but the description itself lacks explicit guidance or exclusions.

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