ms_list_cabinets

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it returns JSON with active/cabinets/fields_needed and guarantees that secret values are never returned. This reassures the agent about side effects and data safety beyond the basic read-only flag.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the main action is front-loaded and the return-structure detail is immediately useful. Every sentence adds information about behavior or output.

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-only listing tool, the description plus readOnlyHint and output schema cover everything an agent needs. It states the purpose, the output fields, and the confidentiality guarantee, with no missing prerequisites or side-effect considerations.

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 takes zero parameters, and context signals indicate 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter gap to compensate. The description's mention of the return shape helps the agent understand what the no-argument call yields.

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' with the resource 'configured cabinets' and explicitly says 'for this marketplace and which one is active.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ms_use_cabinet or ms_add_cabinet, which target different operations on cabinets.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to choose it over alternatives or when not to use it. The intended use case is implied by the verb, and siblings like ms_use_cabinet suggest complementary actions, but there is no explicit routing guidance.

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