config_list_hours_of_operations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read operation via 'list', but does not disclose required permissions, pagination behavior, or response structure. Minimal transparency beyond the verb.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, making it concise. However, it is under-specified for a tool with three parameters and no other context, so the conciseness reduces the utility.

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 tool has three parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions, the description is far from complete. The output schema exists but its content is not summarized, leaving the agent without guidance on what the response contains.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the three parameters (instance_id, region, max_results). The description adds no semantic value beyond what the schema field names already imply, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 ('hours of operation'), making the core function clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like config_create_hours_of_operation, but the verb+resource adequately conveys what the tool does.

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 provides no information on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as config_create_hours_of_operation. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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