get-runbooks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether results are paginated, or what the response contains. The phrase 'List all runbooks' essentially restates the tool name without adding behavioral context beyond the obvious read intent.

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, 'List all runbooks,' which is front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. Every word earns its place with directness.

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 list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately states the tool's purpose. The main gap is the lack of information about response format or pagination, but given the simplicity, the description is mostly sufficient.

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, so the schema is trivially 100% covered. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed since the schema already indicates no inputs. Per rubric, 0 params baseline is 4.

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 'List all runbooks' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('runbooks') with scope ('all'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling 'get-runbook' by using the plural form and 'all', indicating a bulk listing operation.

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-runbook' (singular) for fetching individual runbooks. The description simply states the action without any context, exclusions, or mention of alternative tools.

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