autotask_list_queues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool lists all queues, but does not mention any side effects, performance implications, authentication requirements, or whether the list is paginated. This is minimal transparency for a simple read operation.

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 sentences long, front-loading the purpose and usage. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), so the description is largely adequate. However, it does not specify the output fields (e.g., id, name) or any prerequisites, which would be helpful for an agent using the result for filtering. Minor gaps reduce completeness.

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 is empty with 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not add parameter semantics beyond what the schema already conveys, which is nothing. 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 clearly states the tool lists all available ticket queues and specifies the purpose of finding queue IDs for filtering tickets. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('available ticket queues'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like autotask_list_ticket_statuses.

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 provides clear context: 'Use this to find queue IDs for filtering tickets by queue.' It implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool (when queue IDs are needed) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives, though no direct alternatives exist.

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