listClients

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail: it returns only 'active' clients, implying inactive clients are excluded. It does not disclose pagination, return format, or how site selection is determined.

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 wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves gaps that a slightly longer description could have closed.

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 simple (one required parameter, rich annotations, no output schema), so the description does not need extensive detail. Still, it should explain how to obtain siteId and whether results are paginated or filtered beyond 'active,' which it does not.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single required siteId parameter. It only says 'for the selected site,' which loosely maps to siteId but gives no format, source (e.g., from listSites), or constraints. This does not sufficiently compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 active clients') with a clear scope ('for the selected site'). It is distinguishable from siblings like listDevices and listSites, though it does not explicitly name the boundary between clients and devices.

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 implied by the phrase 'for the selected site,' which signals that a site must already be selected. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus listDevices or listSites, nor any exclusions or preconditions.

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