get_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'pagination support', which is useful behavioral context, but fails to disclose critical traits like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the output format looks like. For a list operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant 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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get all agents in Freshdesk') and adds essential behavioral detail ('with pagination support'). Every word earns its place with zero 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, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage for a 2-parameter tool, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and hints at pagination but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, return format, and explicit parameter guidance, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'pagination support', which indirectly relates to the 'page' and 'per_page' parameters, but doesn't explain their semantics, defaults, or constraints. The description adds minimal value beyond what the parameter names imply, resulting in a baseline score.

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 ('Get all agents') and resource ('in Freshdesk'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from 'view_agent' (singular) and 'search_agents' (filtered search) by specifying 'all agents', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'list_agents' (which doesn't exist in siblings).

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 mentions 'pagination support', which implies usage for large datasets, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_agents' or 'view_agent'. No context about prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative scenarios is given.

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