list_suppressions

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the burden of disclosing behavior: it clearly states the operation is read-only and restricted to admin scope, and limits results to 'currently active' suppressions. It doesn't describe response fields or error behavior, but for a zero-parameter list tool the key behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 short sentences; the first is front-loaded with the core action and object, the second adds essential safety/authorization context. No filler or 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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and authorization clearly. It lacks an explicit note about the shape of returned entries, but that is largely inferable from the tool name and sibling context.

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 zero properties, so schema coverage is vacuously 100% and there are no parameters to explain. Baseline 4 applies because the description needs no parameter elaboration.

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?

States it 'List the currently active market suppressions' with a clarifying parenthetical '(the kill switches in effect)'. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from the mutating siblings suppress_market and unsuppress_market.

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?

Explicitly identifies itself as read-only and scopes authorization to 'same admin scope as suppress_market', signaling when it is safe/appropriate to call and under what permissions. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but in context the sibling tools are clearly the mutating counterparts.

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