list_endpoints_sagemaker

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List all SageMaker Endpoints' implies a read-only operation but does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or any side effects. It lacks explicit transparency beyond the basic action.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It is appropriately front-loaded and easily scannable, containing exactly the necessary information for such a simple tool.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters) and has an output schema, but the description is very brief. It does not mention pagination or clarify the scope (e.g., regional or account-wide), and given the many sibling tools, some usage context would improve completeness.

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 zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies since there is nothing to describe; the description does not need to add parameter semantics.

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 ('SageMaker Endpoints'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like describe_endpoint_sagemaker and list_endpoint_configs_sagemaker. It leaves no ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as describe_endpoint_sagemaker or list_endpoint_configs_sagemaker. It simply states the action without any situational context or exclusions.

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