cloud_storage_list_buckets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the return format and that it operates across all regions, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention permissions, pagination, or potential rate limits, which are relevant for a list operation that could return many buckets. The description adds some useful context but lacks full behavioral transparency.

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 concise, with two sentences. It front-loads the primary purpose and then provides a clear, structured breakdown of the return values. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

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's low complexity (no parameters) and absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the return values and global scope. It does not mention potential pagination or limits, which could be relevant for a list-all tool, but for a simple bucket listing operation, the description is largely complete. A brief note about pagination would make it fully complete.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The input schema is empty and the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The description's mention of the return fields adds value beyond the schema, which has no properties.

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 (buckets), with the scope 'across all regions.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cloud_storage_list_objects (which lists objects within a bucket) and cloud_storage_get_bucket_location (which gets a specific bucket's location). The purpose is unambiguous and well-differentiated.

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 clearly indicates the tool's scope ('across all regions'), which implies it is the top-level bucket listing operation. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this over the sibling tools or include any exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit alternative guidance.

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