list_automations

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It indicates a read operation (listing) and includes constraints (admin only, hosted API). However, it does not disclose whether the operation is safe, has side effects, or any rate limits. The transparency is adequate but not detailed.

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 efficiently communicates the tool's action, scope, included data, and usage restrictions. Every phrase is meaningful, and there is no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential information: what is listed, what data is provided, and access constraints. It could be improved by mentioning output format or pagination, but it is sufficient for an agent to use 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 tool has no parameters, so the input schema covers 100% of the parameter documentation. According to guidelines, this gives a baseline of 4. The description adds no extra parameter information because none is needed.

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 the tool lists all automation rules with run/failure counts for the user's account. It specifies 'admin only' and 'Hosted API only', making the purpose and scope unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_automation or delete_automation by focusing on 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?

The description provides clear context that the tool is restricted to administrators and available only on the hosted API. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when to use this tool versus other list tools. The usage constraints are helpful but could be more explicit.

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