list_analyses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful extra context: results are cached for 5 minutes, every analysis in the account is returned, and status values are enumerated (CREATION_SUCCESSFUL, UPDATE_SUCCESSFUL, etc.), which helps the agent interpret results.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then scope, caching, and field list. Well structured with a bullet list, though the per-field enumeration partially overlaps with the existing output schema and could be trimmed.

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-value documentation is not strictly needed, yet the description still covers scope, caching, and status values. It is complete for a no-parameter list tool; only the missing sibling routing keeps it from a 5.

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 the baseline is 4. The description correctly describes no inputs and instead documents the returned fields, which is more than required.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all QuickSight analyses') plus the fields returned. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling search_analyses, so an agent must infer that this returns the full unfiltered set.

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?

'Use this to discover analyses before inspecting them' gives implied workflow context, and 'Returns every analysis in the account' hints at the unfiltered scope. However, it never names search_analyses or describe_analysis as alternatives or states when this is the wrong choice.

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