List technicians

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

Annotations already mark as readOnlyHint=true and non-destructive. Description adds behavioral details: pagination, cursor support, and specific output fields (status, tier, skills, crew relations). No contradiction with 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?

Four sentences with slight redundancy (first sentence repeats title). Still efficient and front-loaded with key information. Could trim the first sentence without loss.

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?

Provides a complete picture for a list tool: explains returned fields, pagination, cursor for sync, and a practical use case (preferred_technician_id). No output schema needed; description suffices.

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 covers all 7 parameters (100% coverage). Description adds value by explaining `since` cursor usage and linking to preferred_technician_id, going beyond schema descriptions.

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 states it lists technicians (field workers) with status, tier, skills, crew relations, and explicitly links to dispatch scheduling. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getTechnician or createTechnician by focusing on roster listing.

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?

Provides usage guidance such as discovering preferred_technician_id and using `since` cursor for incremental sync. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among similar list tools like listNearbyTechnicians or listTechnicianSkills.

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