list_trusted_tools

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behaviors. It only mentions listing with optional filter; no info on trust criteria, authentication requirements, side effects, or output behavior.

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?

One sentence, no fluff. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, which is acceptable for a simple tool but could be more informative.

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 tool with 2 simple params and no output schema, the description provides the core action but omits output details (e.g., list structure, pagination) and trust definition. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description must compensate. It explains the query parameter superficially ('optionally filtered by a search query') but does not describe the limit parameter or the expected format/behavior of the query.

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 the tool's function: listing the most trusted MCP tools with optional search filtering. It distinguishes from siblings like check_tool_trust (specific trust check) and scan_mcp_stack (stack scan).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. Lacks context for when filtering is appropriate or any caveats.

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