List all agents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope fact that both connected and disconnected agents are returned, which is beyond the annotations but minimal. No additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, response format) is provided, but given annotations, the description is adequate.

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, concise sentence that states the action and scope without redundant words. The parenthetical adds essential distinguishing information. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is trivial (no parameters, no output schema). The description fully conveys what the tool does: lists all agents, including connected and disconnected ones. There is no missing context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 zero parameters, the schema provides full coverage. The description correctly omits parameter details. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4, and no additional semantics are needed.

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') and the resource ('Cymulate agents') with an explicit scope ('all (connected + disconnected)'). This directly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'cymulate_agents_list_connected', which lists only connected agents.

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 parenthetical '(connected + disconnected)' provides clear context that this tool returns all agents, implying it should be used when both types are needed. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool as an alternative, but the distinction is evident from the sibling name 'cymulate_agents_list_connected'.

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