list_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists 'all custom agents available to the current tenant' and references 'KB selection mode' in the response, offering some scoping. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, permissions, or whether the list is ordered, though the schema implies pagination.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by a clear usage directive. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 simple list tool with two optional pagination parameters and no output schema, the description provides a clear purpose, usage context, and a hint of the response fields (agent IDs, names, KB selection mode). It is mostly sufficient, though it could explicitly state that the response is an array of agent objects.

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?

Both parameters (page and page_size) are fully described in the schema with default values, yielding 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond that baseline, so a score 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('custom agents available to the current tenant'). It further clarifies the intent by stating it is used to discover agent IDs, names, and KB selection mode before calling agent_chat, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_agent and agent_chat.

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 advises using this tool before agent_chat to discover agent identifiers and settings. It provides clear context for when to use it, but it does not mention alternatives like get_agent for retrieving a single agent's details or explicitly state when not to use it.

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