list-policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description adds little beyond stating the scope ('in the RabbitMQ cluster'). It does not explain pagination, ordering, or result format, which would be valuable for a list operation.

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 unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core action and scope.

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 simple read-only list tool with no parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe the return value structure or any edge cases, leaving the agent to assume typical RabbitMQ policy information. Without an output schema, more detail would enhance completeness.

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 has no parameters, and coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema implies. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already fully informs the agent about parameter requirements.

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 tool lists all policies in the RabbitMQ cluster, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get-policy' or 'list-policies-vhost' by implying a cluster-wide 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list-policies-vhost' (for a specific vhost) or 'get-policy' (for a single policy). The description does not mention any exclusions or preferred usage scenarios.

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