list_decoders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination behavior (defaults, limits), sorting behavior, or what happens when no results are found. The agent would not know about the implicit pagination or sorting capabilities.

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 sentence of nine words with no extraneous information. It is efficient and front-loaded with the essential function.

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 list operation with pagination, the description does not mention default pagination values (limit=10, offset=0) or sorting options. Given the lack of output schema, the agent lacks guidance on what the response looks like. The description is adequate but incomplete for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds 'optional name filtering', which aligns with the 'name' parameter. No additional semantic value is provided beyond what the schema already offers, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists Wazuh decoders with optional name filtering, using a specific verb and resource. Among sibling tools, no other tool targets decoders, so it is well-distinguished.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (to list decoders, optionally filtered by name). It does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives, but the purpose is straightforward.

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