Unraid API getAvailableAuthActions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description's 'List' phrasing is consistent with those annotations but adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether the returned list varies by caller or whether authentication is required.

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 wasted words. It states the verb and object clearly and is appropriately sized for a parameterless read-only tool.

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 zero-parameter read-only query, the description is mostly complete: the agent knows what will happen and needs no input. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the returned list contains, and the ambiguity about 'authentication actions' prevents a perfect completeness score.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The schema is empty and fully covered, and the baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing for the description to clarify.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('authentication actions supported by the API'), so an agent can understand what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from closely related sibling tools like query_api_key_possible_permissions or query_permissions_for_roles, leaving some ambiguity about the exact 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many similar query tools. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or contextual prerequisites, so the agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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