digiforma_list_trainees

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. 'List' implies a read-only enumerating operation and 'with their basic contact info' discloses the output shape. But it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, mention pagination, or define what 'basic' excludes, so some behavioral ambiguity remains.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning; 'registered in Digiforma' adds needed context and the parenthetical clarifies the learner terminology.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter list tool, the description gives the essential purpose and a rough idea of the response ('basic contact info'), especially since there is no output schema. However, it leaves 'basic contact info' vague, does not mention pagination or field limitations, and omits any routing to sibling tools like digiforma_get_trainee when richer data is needed.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is an empty object with 100% coverage. With no parameters to document, the description only needs to make clear that invocation requires no arguments, which it effectively does by not mentioning any.

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 uses a specific verb+resource pair: 'List trainees (learners/apprenants) registered in Digiforma'. It also tells the agent what to expect in the result ('basic contact info'), and the resource is clearly distinct from sibling tools like digiforma_get_trainee or digiforma_list_training_sessions.

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 verb 'List': the tool is for enumerating registered trainees, not for fetching a single trainee or querying arbitrary data. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this over digiforma_get_trainee or digiforma_graphql, and gives no exclusions or alternatives.

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