tempo_get_teams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the filtering capability and discloses nothing about pagination behavior, default result counts, or the compact/full view tradeoff — though the schema carries the latter. Consistent with annotations, no contradiction.

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 short sentences with zero filler, and the primary purpose is front-loaded before the filter list. It is efficient but extremely terse, leaving no room for the routing or behavioral context a multi-param list tool benefits from.

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?

With 7 optional parameters, an output schema absent, and annotations covering read-only safety, the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain the view parameter's effect on payload shape or the team record structure, relying entirely on the schema to convey those details.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, and the baseline is 3. The description names three of the seven filters (name, teamMembers, teamIds) but adds no meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions and omits view, limit, offset, and includeMemberships entirely.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve a list of Tempo teams'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. However, it never distinguishes itself from the close sibling tempo_get_team (singular), which also retrieves a team, leaving a small ambiguity about plural-list vs single-record.

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 second sentence implies usage by naming the filter dimensions ('by name, member account ids, or specific team ids'), which hints at when this tool is useful. It offers no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and never routes the agent to alternatives like tempo_get_team or tempo_get_team_memberships.

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