list_acs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb 'List' implies a non-destructive read operation, and the specific data fields are disclosed. However, it does not address potential behaviors like pagination, authorization requirements, or edge cases (e.g., no ACs found), which would add transparency but are not critical for a simple list tool.

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 that front-loads the action and includes necessary clarification in parentheses. Every word contributes value, 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and data fields. It does not mention pagination or failure modes, but these are not strictly necessary given the simplicity and the presence of an output schema that defines return structure.

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 schema already covers them (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter-specific information, which is appropriate. The baseline of 4 applies since parameters are absent.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List all ACs'. It further clarifies that ACs are Matter Thermostat endpoints and enumerates the data fields returned, making it distinct from siblings like get_ac or set_ac.

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 implies a listing operation for all ACs but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus get_ac (single AC) or set_ac. No alternatives are referenced, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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