list_resource_pools

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List all resource pools' and does not add context about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return format. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated, and no other behaviors are disclosed.

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 extremely concise—a single short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and target. Every word adds value, and there is no unnecessary information.

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 tool's simplicity (0 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It adequately states the purpose and scope, though it does not specify the output format or any filters. Since none exist, this is sufficient but could benefit from a note on returned data.

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 zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no extra parameter-related ambiguity.

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 'List all resource pools' uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('resource pools') with a scope ('all'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_resource_pool_status' or 'list_templates', which target different resources or actions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or context. The description simply states the action without any situational advice or comparisons.

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