acr_list_registries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates the tool is read-only and optionally filters by resource group, but does not mention default behavior (e.g., lists all in current subscription), safety, or error conditions. Basic transparency is achieved.

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 extremely concise—two lines plus a parameter block—with no wasted words. It front-loads the main action and efficiently structures the parameter details.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, output schema exists), the description adequately covers purpose and parameter semantics. It could mention that listing without a resource group applies to the current subscription, but overall it's sufficient for an AI agent.

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 has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by documenting the resource_group parameter as 'Optional resource group name to filter by'. This adds clear meaning, though it could explicitly state the default behavior when omitted.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'container registries' with scope 'in a resource group or subscription'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like acr_list_repositories or acr_show_registry by targeting a different resource type.

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 stating what it does, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to use acr_show_registry for a single registry or when to apply the resource group filter.

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