list_agents

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the action of listing. There are no annotations to indicate read-only or destructive behavior, and the description does not mention authentication, rate limits, or what happens when the roster is empty. The word 'List' implies a read-only operation, but this is implicit rather than explicit.

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 sentence that is direct and free of unnecessary words. It covers the primary purpose but is too brief to provide usage context, which slightly reduces its effectiveness compared to a more complete but still concise description.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description gives the essential action but omits guidance on alternative tools and the role of the timezone parameter. It is adequate but has clear gaps in contextual framing.

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 one optional parameter ('timezone') fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about how timezone affects the output, so it relies on the schema's 100% coverage. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the action ('List') and resource ('TaskRouter worker roster') and adds the purpose of capturing each agent's current activity status. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tool 'get_agent_activity', which may offer a related but distinct functionality.

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 like 'get_agent_activity' or 'search_calls'. The description only states what it does, not the contexts where it is preferred or where other tools should be used.

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