List services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the transparency burden. 'List' clearly implies a read-only, non-mutating operation, and the optional filters are mentioned. However, it does not disclose possible pagination, ordering, permission requirements, or how filters interact, though the presence of an output schema mitigates some return-value ambiguity.

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 a single focused sentence with no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the optional-filter clause is concise. It is appropriately sized for a simple listing tool.

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 only two optional parameters, simple filter behavior, and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential calling context. It could add guidance on pagination or how multiple filters combine, but these are minor gaps for a low-complexity list tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds the meaning that 'tier' and 'environment' are optional filters rather than required inputs. However, it does not explain acceptable values, semantics, or examples for either parameter, leaving the agent to rely on the parameter names themselves.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('the application/service catalogue'), and the optional filtering behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_deployments and get_runbook, so an agent can identify what this tool returns without opening the schema.

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 makes the intended use clear: retrieve the service catalogue, with optional tier/environment filtering. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the resource scope is specific enough that an agent can infer when this tool is appropriate.

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