list_programs

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

The description notes auto-pagination behavior but lacks details on idempotency, rate limits, or data freshness. Without annotations, the description does not fully disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic listing operation.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with zero waste. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core functionality.

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 description explains what the tool does but omits the return format (e.g., list of program names/IDs) and any authentication or permission prerequisites. Given no output schema, this is a moderate gap.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for page_size. The tool description adds auto-pagination context but does not elaborate on how page_size interacts with that behavior, so it adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 bug bounty programs you have access to on HackerOne' using a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_program_details by focusing on listing all accessible programs.

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 implies use for retrieving all programs via 'auto-paginates to return all programs', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_program_details for individual program info.

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