List pac auth profiles

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

No annotations are provided, but the description explicitly labels the tool 'Read-only' and discloses what it reports: available profiles, the active profile, and account ownership. It does not describe output structure or error behavior, but for a zero-parameter listing tool the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Three short statements convey output content, use case, and read-only nature with no filler. The first sentence is a grammatical fragment ('The pac authentication profiles...'), but it remains compact and front-loaded.

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, zero-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the call returns, why to call it, and its safety. It could include exact output formatting, but the agent has enough information to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

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 the schema coverage is 100% because there is nothing to document. The description's mention of 'profile' is about a value to pass to other admin tools, not an input to this tool. Baseline 4 for zero params applies.

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 specifies the resource (PAC auth profiles on this machine), the output aspects (active profile and owning account), and the intended role (finding the admin profile name). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like cs_select_auth_profile and cs_delete_auth_profile, though the opening is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb like 'Lists'.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to use the tool to find the admin profile name to pass as 'profile' to admin tools. It does not name alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use it, but the use case is clear enough to guide tool selection.

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