rm_list_placeholder_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds purpose context but no additional behavioral detail such as pagination limits or result ordering. This is adequate given the annotations.

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 leads with the action and resource, then briefly states the domain purpose. There is no fluff or redundant restating of the tool name.

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 paginated list with no required parameters and an output schema, this description is nearly complete. It lacks explicit mention of pagination, but the input schema's page/per_page defaults cover that, and the annotations cover read-only 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%, and the description provides no parameter information. The two parameters, page and per_page, are self-explanatory from their names and defaults, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions as required at this coverage level.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('placeholder resources'), and adds the purpose ('forecasting and capacity modeling'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rm_create_placeholder_resource and rm_delete_placeholder_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 gives clear context for when this tool is relevant: retrieving placeholder resources for forecasting and capacity modeling. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but there is no other list-placeholder-resources sibling, so the context is sufficient.

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