sentinel_ml_analytics_settings_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose details like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what 'all' entails (e.g., completeness, ordering). For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to scan and understand quickly. Every part of the sentence adds value without 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?

Given no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter details, behavioral context, and output information. For a tool with one parameter and no structured support, more guidance is needed to be fully helpful.

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 has 1 parameter ('kwargs') with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about parameters. The description doesn't explain what 'kwargs' represents, its format, or how it affects the listing. With low schema coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving parameters undocumented.

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 action ('List all') and resource ('Sentinel ML analytics settings'), with scope ('in the current workspace'). It distinguishes from sibling 'sentinel_ml_analytics_setting_get' by indicating it lists all settings rather than retrieving a single one. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'sentinel_analytics_rule_list' beyond the resource type.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare it to other list tools for similar resources (e.g., 'sentinel_analytics_rule_list'). Usage is implied by the resource name but not explicitly stated.

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