ios_features

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description contributes the consumer relationship but says nothing about the shape of the returned list or whether the catalog is static or reflects loaded labs. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is adequate but thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the consumer hint in parentheses. Nothing is wasted and nothing essential is buried.

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 parameterless, read-only listing tool with no output schema, this covers purpose, return content, and downstream use. The only gap is that an agent must guess how the returned generator names map to ios_generate's arguments.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies the tool is argument-free and returns the parameter information an agent needs for the consumer tools.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'List IOS config generators and their parameters'. The parenthetical naming ios_generate and pt_apply_feature anchors it as a discovery tool rather than a config producer, which distinguishes it from those siblings. It stops short of describing what the returned list looks like, but its role is unmistakable.

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 phrase 'used by ios_generate / pt_apply_feature' tells an agent exactly the workflow in which this tool belongs: fetch the parameter catalog before calling one of those two consumers. There are no explicit exclusions or a stated 'call this first' precondition, so it is clear context rather than a full when/when-not rule.

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