herdr_owned_pane_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'This is read-only,' which is a key behavioral trait for a listing tool. However, it does not mention other behaviors like pagination, ordering, or side effects, but for a simple read-only list, the read-only disclosure is sufficient to prevent misuse.

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 with zero fluff. The primary action and object are front-loaded, and the secondary detail (optional filter) follows logically. The read-only note is a concise, valuable addition. 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?

Given the tool has one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential facts: what is listed, the optional filter, and read-only nature. It does not state the return format or any pagination details, but for a focused list tool, the description is reasonably complete for correct invocation.

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 defines controller_id as optional but provides no description (0% coverage). The description explains that the list can be 'optionally limited to one controller,' directly assigning functional meaning to the parameter. This goes beyond the raw schema and helps the agent understand how to use the optional filter.

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 states a specific action ('List cleanup-only leases for adopted legacy panes') with a clear resource and optional filter. This is distinct from sibling list tools like herdr_owned_worker_list or herdr_pane_list, as it explicitly scopes to cleanup-only leases for adopted legacy panes.

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 clarifies the tool is read-only and optionally limited to one controller, but it does not explicitly tell when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., herdr_lease_inventory or herdr_pane_list). No exclusions or comparisons are given, so the agent must infer usage from the name and context.

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