bus_agents

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and 'List' at least signals a non-mutating read. However, it discloses nothing about whether results are scoped to a workspace, whether stale agents are included, ordering, or pagination/limits — details an agent would need before relying on it.

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 resource comes first and the returned fields follow. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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 listing with no output schema, naming the returned fields (roles, capabilities, last-seen) covers most of what an agent needs. Minor gaps remain around result scope and whether the list is bounded, but the tool's simplicity keeps this near-complete.

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 there is no argument meaning for the description to add; baseline is 4. The sentence correctly implies an unfiltered, full listing, which matches the empty schema.

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 registered agents') and previews the payload ('roles, capabilities, and last-seen times'), so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like bus_status or bus_search, which may also surface agent information, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb 'List' — an agent can infer this is the discovery call for agents, but the description never says when to prefer it over bus_status, bus_search, or bus_channels, nor whether registration (bus_register) is a prerequisite. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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