list_services

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that this is a read-only list operation with filters, but does not mention pagination, default result ordering, or whether filters are AND-combined. These are meaningful but not critical gaps for a simple list tool.

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 that states the action and the filter options with zero redundancy. Every word contributes to the tool's usability.

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 straightforward list tool with three optional, self-documenting parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. It could mention filter composability, but sibling context and the schema fill most gaps.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds example country codes (TN, FR, PT) and restates the filter semantics, but provides no substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Meridian services'), and the plural form clearly distinguishes it from get_service. The three filter dimensions are named upfront, further sharpening the tool's scope.

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?

It clearly states the tool lists services and enumerates the available filters (category slug, active flag, country code), giving an agent concrete criteria for when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for deciding between this and sibling list/get tools.

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