List heroes

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of conveying behavior. It communicates a read-only listing action and a team filter, but does not disclose matching semantics for team, ordering, pagination, or any access constraints. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but not rich.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler words. The action, resource, and optional filter are all present and each phrase earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core operation and the filter. However, it omits usage routing and behavioral details such as team-match behavior and ordering, which leaves the description adequate but incomplete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the phrase 'optionally filtered by team' adds the key meaning that the single parameter restricts the result set rather than being an output field. It does not list valid team values or match rules, but for a simple optional string parameter the filter semantics are clear.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('the Marvel heroes in the roster'), plus an optional team filter. The wording makes it distinguishable from siblings like get_hero and find_heroes_by_power, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Provides no guidance about when to use this tool instead of related tools such as get_hero or find_heroes_by_power. The only usage context is implicit: to list roster heroes, optionally narrowed by team, with no exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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