list_managed_agents

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's statement 'List all registered managed agents' is consistent and adds no contradiction. However, it does not add behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as pagination behavior, ordering, or any side effects. With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the essential purpose. No wasted words.

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 a list operation with pagination parameters, but the description does not explain pagination behavior, result ordering, or what happens when parameters are omitted. Although an output schema exists (not shown), the description lacks sufficient context for an agent to use pagination correctly.

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 two parameters (page_size, page_token) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention these parameters at all, leaving the agent without guidance on how pagination works or what the defaults imply. This is a significant gap.

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', the resource 'managed agents', and the scope 'in the project'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_managed_agent (single) and create_managed_agent (creation).

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. For example, it doesn't mention that get_managed_agent is for retrieving a single agent, or that create_managed_agent is for creation. No when-not or alternative usage hints.

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