faz_list_event_handlers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which establish the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, permission requirements, or response structure. It simply restates the listing action, so it adds no extra transparency beyond annotations.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word contributes, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only listing tool with an output schema available, the description covers the fundamental purpose and scope. It does not mention edge cases like empty ADOM, but given the tool's simplicity and rich annotations, the description is largely sufficient. Some extra notes on ADOM behavior would enhance 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 schema has one optional parameter 'adom' with 0% description coverage. The description only says 'in an ADOM', which vaguely connects the parameter to the tool's scope but does not explain format, required vs optional, or default behavior. This minimal compensation falls short of fully documenting the parameter.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'basic and correlation event handlers' scoped to 'an ADOM'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as faz_list_devices and faz_list_report_templates, which target other resources.

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 the tool is for retrieving event handlers when needed, and the unique resource name among siblings makes the use case obvious. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or mention any exclusions.

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