list_storage_destinations

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior. The description goes beyond them by disclosing that credentials are withheld from results and that the required scope is storage:read — both are genuine operational details an agent needs before calling.

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?

Three short sentences, led by the core action and scope of the resource; nothing is padded. It is slightly telegraphic, but every clause earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description partially compensates by telling the agent what comes back (destination listings minus credentials). With zero parameters and full annotation coverage, the agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies the tool is unfiltered and takes no arguments, leaving nothing to misinterpret.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('configured S3, Google Cloud Storage and Azure destinations'), and adds the meaningful qualifier 'without credentials'. It distinguishes itself from verify_storage_destination and list_storage_deliveries by clearly being a read-only enumeration of configured destinations, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

'Configure destinations in the dashboard' implies this tool is for viewing only and that creation/editing happens elsewhere, which is useful routing context. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, so usage is only implied.

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