list_service_quotas

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by disclosing that results are limited to quotas retained by DoiT's collectors, are sorted by utilization percentage, and require pagination via pageToken. These are important behavioral traits not captured in the annotations.

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 appropriately structured, starting with the purpose, then limitations, sorting, and pagination. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds necessary context. It is not overly long or redundant.

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 description covers the core functionality, limitations, sorting, and pagination. It does not mention potential errors or authentication requirements beyond 'for the authenticated customer,' but given the read-only nature and existing annotations, it is sufficiently complete for a user to understand when and how to use the tool.

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 only includes a description for customerContext. The tool description explains pagination (pageToken) and sorting (utilization), but does not elaborate on cloudProvider or minUtilizationPercent. These parameters are relatively self-explanatory from their names and enum/min-max constraints, so the description adds limited extra meaning.

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's function: monitoring and returning service quota usage snapshots. It distinguishes this from other tools by explicitly mentioning the resource type (service quotas) and the data source (DoiT's monitoring collectors).

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 explains the tool's purpose and limitations, including that results are not a complete or live inventory. It also provides pagination instructions, which are practical usage guidelines. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but given the specific resource type, it is clear when to use this tool.

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