list_device_tier_configs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'List' reasonably implies a read-only operation, and it clarifies the scope, but the description does not mention pagination, permissions, errors, or whether the app must already exist. It is adequate but not deeply transparent.

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 eight-word sentence that is immediately understandable and contains no filler. It front-loads the verb 'List' and states the resource and scope concisely.

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 low-complexity tool with one fully documented parameter and an output schema, this description is mostly adequate. It would be slightly more complete if it explicitly contrasted with get_device_tier_config or noted any list-specific caveats, but the current text covers the core behavior well.

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 schema already fully describes the only parameter, package_name, as 'App package name', so there is no semantic gap for the description to fill. The description adds only the generic app-level scope; it provides no additional examples, constraints, or syntax details beyond what the schema gives.

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 identifies the operation: 'List all device tier configs for an app.' The plural 'configs' and 'all' distinguish it from a single-fetch tool like get_device_tier_config, and it clearly names both the action and the resource 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 intended use case is implied: use this when you want to enumerate all device tier configs for an app. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer it over get_device_tier_config, nor does it give any exclusions or alternative guidance.

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