cortex_list_backends

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds context about costs, the sellable flag, and being free, but it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, whether any permissions are required, or if there are side effects—though a list operation is implicitly safe.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by a concise usage hint. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 parameterless list tool, the description provides a comprehensive overview of the returned data categories (availability, cost, price, sellable flag) and a practical usage context. Despite lacking annotations and an output schema, it is self-sufficient and covers the essential information an agent needs.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100% since the properties object is empty. The description adds no parameter semantics because none are needed; it appropriately focuses on the output fields instead.

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 verb 'List' with a specific resource ('solver backends'), enumerates the returned fields (availability, cost, price, sellable flag), and distinguishes itself from sibling optimization/job tools by its clear list-oriented scope.

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 provides a clear usage directive ('check this before choosing a quantum backend') and notes the tool is free, which indicates when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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