Get Agents By Owner

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by noting pagination coverage reporting and the 'selfDeclared' slot in output, which are not in annotations.

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?

Three focused sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the primary action, followed by needed details and output structure.

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 presence of an output schema and good annotations, the description covers pagination and key output details. Minor gaps include explanation of the 'verify' parameter and the '3-axis engine' ranking mechanism.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description compensates partially by mentioning limit (up to 20 agents) and owner ('owner endpoint'). However, the 'verify' parameter is unexplained, and details about the ranking engine are vague.

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 agents for a given owner, with pagination and ranking. It distinguishes from siblings like list_agents (generic) and find_agent (search). However, the phrase 'owner endpoint's current page' is slightly ambiguous.

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 when you need agents for a specific owner, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like list_agents. Usage context is implicit but not explicit.

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