action1_list_endpoints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action (listing) and resource type, but gives no information about pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. The inclusion of the include_update_counts parameter hinting at slower queries is in the schema, not the description.

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 a single concise sentence of 10 words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place. The parenthetical clarifies the definition without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

The tool is a straightforward list operation with an output schema and fully documented parameters. The description, while brief, defines the resource clearly. It does not explain return values, but the output schema covers that. It lacks usage alternatives, yet the overall completeness is good for a simple read-only tool.

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% (all four parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter context beyond the schema. It names no parameters, but the schema already provides sufficient semantics.

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 the action "List" and the specific resource "managed endpoints". The parenthetical "machines with the Action1 agent installed" distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_discovered_endpoints, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies this tool is for managed endpoints (as opposed to discovered ones), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_discovered_endpoints or get_endpoint. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred contexts.

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