Listar agentes OpenCode

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It implies read-only behavior by using 'devuelve' (returns), but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, requires no special permissions, or how it handles missing directories. The behavior is relatively transparent for a listing tool, but the description adds little beyond the basic 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no redundant information. It earns its place with direct wording.

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 one optional parameter, the description is sufficient: it states what is returned (agents, models, modes). With no output schema, it could provide a bit more detail about response structure, but the essential purpose is well covered.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter with a clear description of 'directory'. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. No additional clarification about formats or defaults is given.

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 tool returns primary agents and subagents with their models and modes, which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes from siblings like opencode_providers or opencode_sessions by focusing on agent listing.

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 such as opencode_providers or opencode_status. It does not mention any prerequisites or scenarios where this is the appropriate choice.

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