List Operators

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that results are scoped by the configured operator's visibility, which is useful. However, it does not state read-only safety, permission requirements, or other operational traits beyond the implicit 'List' verb.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase contributes: the action, the resource, and the visibility scope.

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 schema and the presence of an output schema, the description covers enough for an agent to understand the tool's basic behavior. It does not need to explain return values, but it could be more complete by clarifying when this list is preferable to alternatives.

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, so there is nothing for the description to document. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description appropriately avoids describing nonexistent arguments.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List console operators.' It also adds scope with 'visible to the configured operator,' which helps distinguish it from a single-operator tool like get_operator. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from sibling list tools such as list_roles.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus get_operator, whoami, or other listing tools. The implied usage is simply that it lists operators, but no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives are named.

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