List Lyzr ACI Tools

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'org-wide' scope, which is useful context, but does not disclose other behavioral details such as pagination or filtering. It is consistent with the annotations, so not contradictory.

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 sentence containing only necessary information. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no wasted words.

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 simple, parameterless list operation. With no output schema, the description could explain the returned format, but 'list' strongly implies a collection of tools. The org-wide scope adds clarity. Overall, it is reasonably complete for the tool's complexity.

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 input schema has zero parameters, giving the baseline a 4. The description adds minimal semantic meaning beyond 'org-wide', which is sufficient given the parameterless interface.

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 'List org-wide Lyzr ACI tools' uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies a resource type ('Lyzr ACI tools') with a scope ('org-wide'). It is clear but does not distinguish itself from many sibling listing tools such as 'lyzr_list_tools' or 'lyzr_get_all_tools'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only states the basic action without naming competing list tools or giving exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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