list_capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds meaningful context about informational-only fields in global mode and the safety property that setup never executes a workload. This enriches behavior understanding beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then adds necessary clarifications. It is somewhat verbose but each sentence contributes useful behavioral guidance, so no sentence is wasted.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the key contexts: global vs. adapter-scoped, and the safety of managed setup. Missing mode semantics is a minor gap but does not make the tool unusable.

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 schema documents the adapter parameter with a clear description, and the description reinforces its meaning, including the effect of omitting it. However, the mode parameter (passive, active_cached, active_refresh) is only an enum with no explanation in schema or description, leaving a semantic gap.

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 it 'List capabilities and setup actions scoped to a selected capture adapter,' which is a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes the global read-only mode from adapter-scoped mode, setting it apart from sibling tools like start_capability_setup and get_capability_setup.

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 gives clear guidance: omit adapter for a read-only inventory, and select an adapter before mutating the managed environment. It also notes that managed setup never executes a workload, though it does not name alternative tools explicitly.

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