list

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It fully describes the output structure (instance name, owner, status fields) and implies a read-only operation. No behavioral contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. First sentence states purpose and output details; second sentence provides usage guidance. Every word contributes.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and when to use it. No gaps are present; it is self-contained and complete.

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?

No parameters, and schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Description adds value by detailing the output fields, which is not in the schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, but the extra context justifies a 5.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all registered MCP instances and their current claim status', specifying the verb 'list' and resource 'MCP instances'. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'claim' by implying this tool is for viewing availability before claiming.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is given: 'Use this to see what's available before claiming.' This clearly indicates when to use it (before claiming) and differentiates from sibling tools like 'claim' and 'who'. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use but is sufficient.

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