rba_list_watchers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, which provides some transparency. However, it does not state what is returned (e.g., list of watcher paths, status) or mention any permissions or limitations, leaving 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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. It wastes no words and is well-suited for the simple nature of the tool.

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?

For a tool with no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It fully explains the tool's purpose for a simple list operation. However, it could benefit from a note about return format or relationship to other watcher tools, but given the simplicity, this is not critical.

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 zero parameters, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not introduce any confusion about parameters.

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 ('List') and the resource ('active RBA file watchers'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rba_watch_file (creates watchers) and rba_stop_all_watchers (stops watchers), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage: use this when you need to see active watchers. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide any exclusions. The context from sibling names helps, but no direct guidance is given.

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