list_visuals

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already declares this as a safe, non-mutating read. The description adds that results carry 'type and location info', a mild bit of behavioral context, but this overlaps with the output schema and no pagination, scoping, or auth behavior is 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource lead. It is efficient, though it could carry slightly more routing detail at the same length.

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 read-only listing tool with an output schema and full schema description coverage, the definition is adequate: the agent knows what it returns and what to pass. The only real gap is the unstated relationship to 'list_sheet_visuals'.

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% with a single documented 'analysis_id' parameter, so the schema fully carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation at this coverage level.

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 gives a specific verb ('List') and resource ('visuals in a QuickSight analysis'), plus the returned fields ('type and location info'). It scopes the tool to the analysis level, but does not explicitly distinguish it from the closely related sibling 'list_sheet_visuals', leaving that contrast implicit.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as 'list_sheet_visuals' or 'get_visual_definition'. Usage must be inferred from the name and the phrase 'in a QuickSight analysis'.

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