pbs_notification_matchers_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It reveals the tool is READ-ONLY and needs specific config, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose potential pagination, permission requirements, or performance characteristics, which could affect agent decision-making.

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 redundant information. It efficiently conveys purpose, read-only nature, and a configuration prerequisite.

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?

The tool has an output schema that handles return structure. The description covers the core purpose and a prerequisite. It could mention that it lists all matchers without filtering, but given the simplicity and existence of output schema, it is largely complete.

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 has 100% coverage of its single optional parameter. The description does not add any further meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'PBS notification matchers', with a parenthetical explanation 'alert routing rules'. It distinguishes from siblings like pbs_notification_matcher_get and pbs_notification_matcher_delete, which operate on individual matchers, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 indicates the tool is read-only and requires PROXIMO_PBS_* config, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., for overview before deleting/modifying). Usage context is implied but not fully defined.

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