map_trigger_list

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the agent knows it is safe and idempotent. The description adds the traits 'bounded set' and 'ephemeral,' which give context about the triggers' nature but do not contradict annotations. No annotation contradiction detected.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It contains no redundant information, though it is very brief. It earns its place but could be expanded slightly without losing conciseness.

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 one parameter and an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'bridge-owned ephemeral triggers' are, how the 'bounded' limit works, or what the output contains (though the output schema exists). For a listing tool among many trigger tools, more context is needed for full completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all. The schema only shows a single optional integer parameter with defaults and bounds; the description adds no semantic meaning to help the agent select or set the parameter correctly.

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 states 'List a bounded set of bridge-owned ephemeral triggers,' which clearly indicates a listing operation on triggers with specific qualifiers (bounded, bridge-owned, ephemeral). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like map_trigger_get (single) or map_trigger_create (creation), though the term 'bridge-owned' could benefit from clarification.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many trigger-related siblings (e.g., map_trigger_get, map_trigger_events). It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where alternatives are preferred.

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