list_industries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It explains what is returned (id, label pairs) and implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it does not mention whether results are paginated or if there are any limitations (e.g., only active industries). For a simple list tool, this is adequate.

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 concise sentences: first states the action, second specifies the output format. No extraneous information. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (as per context signals), the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and returns. It does not need to elaborate further for this simple list operation.

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 parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by stating the output format, but no parameter-level semantics are needed. Baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 'List all industries available in the account' and specifies the return format as '{id, label} pairs suitable for populating a company's industry_id.' This directly conveys the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform mutations or searches.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, but given no similar list tool exists among siblings, usage is implied. The description does not mention prerequisites or typical workflows such as before creating a company.

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