list_engines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly states the operation is a listing action covering all available engines, which conveys read-only behavior and broad scope. It does not detail output formatting or ordering, but for a zero-parameter list tool this is reasonably transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value by naming the action, the exchange, and the scope with illustrative categories.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is largely sufficient. It covers the essential context: what resource is listed and where. It could be more complete by clarifying the relationship between engines, markets, and boards, but this is not critical for invoking it correctly.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies that no arguments are needed to call this tool.

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 ('all available trading engines on MOEX') with clarifying examples of engine types. It clearly identifies what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like list_markets or list_boards.

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 implies that this tool should be used when an agent needs to enumerate available trading engines on MOEX. It provides clear context but gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over related siblings such as list_markets or list_boards.

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