ateam_list_solutions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing that the operation is read-only, or any authentication, rate limits, or pagination behavior. Listing inherently suggests non-destructive behavior, but explicit disclosure is missing.

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 front-loads the core purpose. However, it could be considered under-specified, but for its brevity it is appropriately sized.

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?

With no output schema, the description should provide hints about the return format (e.g., list of names or IDs). It does not, leaving the agent uncertain about the response. Given the tool's simplicity, it is marginally adequate but incomplete.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. With no parameters, the baseline score is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details, though it could hint at implicit filtering.

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 identifies the resource ('all solutions deployed in the Skill Builder'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ateam_get_solution (single solution) and ateam_show_solution_minimal (minimal view) by indicating scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ateam_get_solution or ateam_show_solution_minimal. The description does not indicate prerequisites or context for use.

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