Aegis List Services

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: it's a read-only operation (implied by 'List'), returns specific non-sensitive data, and explicitly states what is never returned (secrets). It could improve by mentioning potential limitations like rate limits or authentication requirements.

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 perfectly concise with two clear sentences: one stating the action and resource, another detailing the return values and important exclusion. Every word earns its place with zero wasted text.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides good context about what data is returned and what isn't. It could be more complete by describing the return format (e.g., list structure) or any behavioral constraints, but it adequately covers the essential information given the tool's simplicity.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the lack of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter information, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and output behavior.

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 specific action ('List all available services') and resource ('services registered in Aegis'), distinguishing it from siblings like health checks or proxy requests. It specifies what information is returned (service names, auth types, allowed domains) and explicitly excludes secrets.

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 context by stating it returns service metadata, suggesting it's for discovery or auditing purposes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria, leaving some guidance gaps.

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