list_printers

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's disclosure of it being a listing operation is consistent. The description adds value by specifying that the result includes printer details and the fields returned, but does not go beyond what annotations already convey about safety (no destructive action, read-only).

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and scope, second lists returned fields. No wasted words, essential information front-loaded.

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 tool is a simple list operation with no output schema and good parameter documentation, the description is complete enough. It explains what the tool returns and the scope. However, it could mention pagination behavior or the fact that it's a filtered list (if applicable).

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to explain parameters. They are already documented with clear descriptions (page number, perPage with default and max). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 starts with the verb 'List' and specifies the resource 'printers' with the scope 'all printers configured in BizPrint', and enumerates specific return fields (id, title, enabled status, station assignment, print settings), which clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_printer (single) or list_print_jobs (different resource).

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 for retrieving a list of printers, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_printer or list_stations. It provides no exclusion criteria or context for choosing among siblings.

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