list_nessus_agents

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 and provides none. It says nothing about authentication requirements, pagination, result limits, or whether the list is tenant-wide or scoped.

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 single short sentence is structurally clean and front-loaded, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than economical writing. It occupies minimal space without conveying useful content.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the tool takes no arguments. However, with no annotations and no usage context, the agent is left without enough information to confidently select or scope this call among the many sibling listers.

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 takes zero parameters, so per the scoring baseline the parameter dimension is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already conveys.

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?

"List Nessus agents" merely restates the tool name and title with no additional detail. It does identify a verb (list) and resource (Nessus agents), but with 30+ siblings it provides no differentiation from related list tools such as list_nessus_users or list_nessus_scans.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist. Given the crowded sibling set (list_tenable_cloud_assets, list_nessus_users, list_nessus_policies, etc.), an agent gets no help choosing between them.

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