lc_list_sensors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the action and parameters, omitting details such as pagination, ordering, return format, or side effects. This is minimal transparency for a data retrieval tool.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the main action and key conditions. It is concisely written with no unnecessary words.

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 list tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides the essential context (required org and optional filter). However, it lacks information on return value structure, pagination, or sorting, which would be important for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by associating 'for an explicit org' with the required 'oid' parameter and mentioning 'optionally filtered by selector' for the 'selector' parameter. It does not explain the 'limit' parameter. This partially compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 verb ('list'), resource ('sensors'), scope ('for an explicit org'), and an optional filter ('by selector'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like lc_find_sensors_by_hostname or lc_list_online_sensors, providing a specific purpose.

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 gives clear context (explicit org required, optional selector) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives. Given the large number of sibling list tools, a bit more guidance would be beneficial.

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