list_assistants

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and a vague return type, omitting details about authentication, pagination, or side effects. The description does not explicitly confirm it is a safe read-only 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 very brief and front-loaded with the purpose. However, the second sentence about the return type is of limited value, making it slightly less informative than ideal while still remaining concise.

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 simple no-parameter list tool, the description provides the essential purpose but lacks detail about the result shape, pagination, or what an assistant object includes. The absence of an output schema makes the vague return type insufficient for full contextual 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema trivially provides 100% coverage. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and there is no additional meaning to add beyond what the schema already implies.

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 all AI Assistants' with a specific verb and resource, and the word 'all' distinguishes it from get_assistant. This is unambiguous and effectively differentiates from siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_assistant or start_assistant_call. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison with similar tools.

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