list_licenses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the limit maximum of 100, which is useful, but does not explain search semantics, pagination behavior, or return format, leaving significant gaps in transparency.

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, well-structured sentence that delivers both purpose and a key parameter constraint. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool with no extraneous information.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks explanation of offset and search behavior, pagination details, and return value structure, making it insufficient for an agent to fully predict tool behavior.

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 clarifies that 'limit' has a maximum of 100, but 'offset' and 'search' remain undocumented in both schema and description, forcing the agent to guess at their meanings and usage.

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 'Search and list licenses' with a clear verb and resource, effectively distinguishing it from other list tools by targeting licenses specifically. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate among sibling list tools like list_license_seats, though the resource term 'licenses' provides sufficient clarity.

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 such as list_license_seats or list_assets. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage entirely from the name and context.

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