get_software

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List all software entries' and lists parameters, offering no additional context about pagination behavior, sorting, rate limits, or potential errors. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 extremely concise, with a single clear sentence for the action and only two lines for parameters. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 the simplicity of a paginated list tool, the description covers the basic purpose and parameters. However, it omits critical context such as usage guidance, pagination behavior, and limitations. The presence of an output schema helps complete return-value knowledge, but the overall description is minimal for an agent to fully rely on.

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 has no property descriptions (0% coverage), and the description provides basic definitions: 'page: Page number' and 'per_page: Results per page'. This adds some clarity but does not go beyond what the property names already imply, lacking any constraints or behavioral details.

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 'List all software entries' with a specific verb and resource, making the core purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_software_by_id, though the use of 'all' implies a collection listing.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, alternative tools for specific needs, or recommended use cases. The description only provides the basic action and parameters.

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