list_missions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the tool reads and returns summaries, implying read-only behavior. It specifies the output fields but does not mention pagination or potential limitations like no filtering. The lack of side-effect disclosure is acceptable as the tool is inherently safe.

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 (24 words), front-loading the main purpose and efficiently adding return field details and a pointer to a sibling tool. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 description is complete for a simple list tool with no parameters. It specifies the output fields and the relationship with get_mission. It could be improved by mentioning any default sorting or if the list is exhaustive, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool 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?

The input schema has no parameters (baseline 4). The description adds value by listing the returned fields, which is helpful for the agent to understand what the response contains. There are no parameter descriptions needed since none exist.

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 it lists all drone missions for the authenticated user and specifies exactly what fields are returned (summaries with id, name, type, waypoint count, center coordinates, tags). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_mission by directing the user to use that for full waypoint details.

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 explicitly says to use get_mission for full waypoint details, providing a clear alternative for when more detail is needed. However, it does not address when to avoid this tool (e.g., if filtering is required) or differentiate from other list tools like list_drones or list_cameras.

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