list_ci

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the mention of filtering indicates capability, but it does not disclose details like pagination, default limits, or any side effects. The description is not misleading, but it adds minimal behavioral context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 that states the primary purpose and optional filters. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 and a well-documented input schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. The description covers the core purpose and filtering options, while the schema covers parameter details. The lack of explicit pagination or default behavior in the description is acceptable because those are present in the schema, making the overall context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description only echoes 'class and query filtering' which maps to the class_name and query parameters, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate for high schema coverage.

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 specific verb 'List' with the resource 'CMDB configuration items', clearly distinguishing it from singular tools like get_ci and generic list tools like list_records. It also mentions optional class and query filtering, which further specifies its 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 implies the tool is for listing CIs with filtering, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as list_records or get_ci. There are no exclusions or alternative references, so the usage context is clear but not explicitly differentiated.

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