swsd_list_departments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns id, name, description (likely already in the output schema) and frames it as a validation step. It doesn't add substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations, and it does not contradict them.

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, immediately front-loaded with the core action ('List SWSD departments'). The purpose is delivered in one extra sentence with zero waste. Every word earns its place.

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?

With a complete output schema and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description adds the intended use case and return fields. It doesn't mention pagination or filtering, but those are already documented in the schema. For a simple, read-only list tool, this is sufficient.

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?

All three parameters (page, query, per_page) have full descriptions in the schema (coverage 100%), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter details or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'SWSD departments', and clarifies it returns id, name, description. It distinguishes from other list tools (e.g., swsd_list_sites, swsd_list_categories) by naming the specific resource and adding a use case. The purpose is unmistakable.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Use this to validate department_name before incident write tools.' This tells when to invoke the tool. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the primary use case is well defined among many sibling list tools.

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