bw_list_changeable_transports

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mechanism (cto/check), default filters (own_only, modifiable_only), and the output (list of requests and tasks). However, it does not describe the return format, error behavior, or any potential side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences: one stating the function and mechanism, another giving usage guidance. No redundant information. Front-loaded with key information. Highly efficient.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, defaults, and mechanism. It mentions that both requests and tasks are listed. Could hint at pagination or response structure, but overall sufficient for an agent to use effectively.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the defaults for own_only and modifiable_only, and ties these to the usage context ('find an open request'). This goes beyond the schema descriptions, justifying a 4.

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 specifies the action (list), resource (transport requests and tasks), context (via BW transport state), and distinguishes from siblings like bw_list_requests by focusing on changeable/modifiable requests. It states the default scope (caller's modifiable requests) and the purpose (find an open request to assign an object).

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 explicitly says 'Use this to find an open request to assign an object to', providing clear guidance on when to use this tool. It implies that other tools might be used for different purposes, but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives. However, given the sibling context, this is sufficient.

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