dynatrace_managed_list_slos

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict it. It adds useful non-obvious behavioral context: evaluate=true requires limiting results to 25 or fewer. It also discloses the categories of returned data, which is helpful since no output schema is provided.

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 three compact sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then summarizes return contents, and ends with a high-value constraint. Every sentence earns its place.

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 schema documents all 11 parameters, and the description adds result-content context and a critical usage constraint. It does not describe the exact output shape or pagination behavior, but the absence of an output schema is partially compensated by the results summary. Overall, an agent has enough information to invoke this tool correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful parameter interaction guidance beyond the schema by warning that evaluate=true forces a limit of 25 or fewer, which is not evident from the individual parameter descriptions.

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 verb and resource: 'List Service Level Objectives (SLOs) from the Managed cluster.' It also enumerates the kind of data returned, which distinguishes this listing operation from the sibling get_slo_details tool.

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 gives clear context by framing this as a listing operation and includes a critical evaluate/limit constraint, but it does not explicitly tell the agent when to use list_slos versus get_slo_details or any other alternative. The distinction is inferable from the tool name and siblings, but not stated.

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