List Scaleway IAM Policies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by specifying the scope ('in this Organization') and the optional filter, which are behavioral traits not captured by annotations. No contradictions are present.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the verb 'List', and contains no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to clarity, making it highly efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is largely complete. It covers the core behavior and filter. A minor gap is the lack of mention of pagination or return format, but for a list operation, the behavior is predictable. The description is sufficient for correct agent usage.

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% (the single parameter application_id has a clear description). The tool description adds the organization scope and restates the filter concept, providing marginal additional context. Since the schema already explains the parameter well, the description adds limited new semantic value, earning a baseline 3.

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 action (List), the resource (IAM Policies), and the scope (in this Organization). It also mentions the optional filter by application, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like scaleway_iam_get_policy and scaleway_iam_list_policy_rules. The verb+resource pattern is specific and unambiguous.

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 implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: when you need to list policies, optionally filtered by application. It does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives (e.g., 'use scaleway_iam_get_policy for a single policy'), but the context of siblings and the clear filter parameter provide sufficient guidance for most scenarios.

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