minia2a_list_services

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already disclosed. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating this is a pre-call discovery step and enumerating what the listing returns (name, description, price, endpoint), reinforcing that it is non-mutating and informational.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, the return contents are summarized, and the usage intent is stated in a single clause.

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 low-complexity read-only list operation with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. Nothing essential is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%: limit, search, and category each already have meaningful descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'List available x402 services on minia2a.uk'. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like call_service or get_service by framing this as the discovery/listing operation that precedes invocation.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this to discover what capabilities are available before calling them', giving a clear when-to-use signal. It does not mention when not to use it or contrast with get_service, but the intended usage context is unambiguous.

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