list_allocations

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it returns a list and supports partial name filtering, but this is also present in the schema. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed beyond what annotations and schema already cover.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with usage context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Efficient and clear.

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 simple list tool with two optional parameters and annotations indicating safety, the description provides clear purpose, usage guidelines, and differentiation. It lacks details about the output format, but given no output schema, it is still fairly complete.

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 is 3. The description mentions partial name filtering, but this is already documented in the schema's description for the name parameter. No new meaning is added.

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 explicitly states it returns a list of cost allocation rules or configurations, uses a specific verb ('list'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like run_query and list_labels.

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?

Clearly states when to use (user wants to see allocations) and explicitly says when not to use (cost queries or labels) with direct alternative tool names (run_query, list_labels).

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