herdr_lease_inventory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'This is read-only', which signals no side effects, and it describes the comparison-and-report behavior. This is strong transparency for a read-only list tool, though it omits any auth requirements or rate limits.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and ends with a clear read-only note. Every word earns its place with no filler or redundant detail.

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 read-only inventory tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and safety. However, it fails to explain the controller_id parameter or any output structure, leaving an agent without enough information to fully use the tool correctly.

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 a single optional parameter, controller_id, with no description (0% coverage). The description completely ignores this parameter, giving an agent no clue about its purpose, format, or impact on results. This is a significant 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 specifies the action ('List live Herdr agents with matching reviewer, writer, or adopted-pane leases') and the additional reporting behavior ('report retained leases whose live identity is missing or changed'). It names the resource and distinguishes this tool from siblings that handle owned workers, panes, or general reconciliation.

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 a clear picture of what the tool does, so an agent can infer when it might be useful (inventory and discrepancy checking). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like herdr_lease_reconcile or herdr_owned_worker_list, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions.

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