infomaniak_list_kchat_bots

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'admin review' purpose, which is a use-case detail rather than a behavioral trait; no additional behavioral context like pagination or filtering is provided, but the output schema covers return values.

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 one sentence with just seven words, containing only the essential action and resource. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, making it exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 zero-parameter input schema, the available output schema, and the read-only annotations, the description is adequate for this simple list operation. The phrase 'for admin review' leaves slight ambiguity about the scope of the listing (all bots vs. pending review), but this is not a critical gap given the low tool complexity.

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, and schema coverage is 100% vacuously. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description cannot add parameter semantics beyond what is already inherent to the tool.

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 resource (kChat bots), with the context 'for admin review.' It is distinct from sibling tools like get_kchat_bot (single bot) and manage_kchat_bot, but does not explicitly differentiate itself, so it's clear but not fully distinguished.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like infomaniak_get_kchat_bot or infomaniak_manage_kchat_bot. The phrase 'for admin review' hints at a use case but does not give explicit context, exclusions, or references to more appropriate tools.

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