apps__app_encryption_declarations__list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the HTTP method and path, which provides some behavioral context but does not disclose additional traits like pagination behavior or side effects beyond what schema and annotations already convey.

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 sentence followed by the HTTP path. Every word is essential and front-loaded. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description could mention the response format or pagination (implied by limit and next_url parameters). The scope is clear, but completeness is minimal given the tool has 6 parameters and is a list operation. It meets the basic need without extra 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 100% parameter description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra explanation or examples for parameters. It relies entirely on the schema for meaning, which is adequate but not enhanced.

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 (list), the resource (app encryption declarations), and the scope (belonging to an app). The included HTTP path further clarifies the operation. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get (single) or create (write).

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state when not to use it (e.g., for a single declaration) or mention alternative tools like app_encryption_declarations__get or create. The agent is left to infer from the verb 'list' alone.

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