herdr_owned_worker_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden — and it does state 'This is read-only', which discloses the primary safety trait. However, it adds little behavioral context beyond that: no mention of what 'persistent' implies about data freshness, whether an acquired controller is required for the filter, or what empty results look like. Adequate but thin.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded and the read-only safety note follows immediately. Every element earns its place.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool, the essentials are covered. Gaps remain: no output description (no output schema exists), no differentiation from herdr_lease_inventory, and the unresolved worker-versus-lease terminology. Adequate but not fully self-sufficient given the large sibling set.

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%, so the description must compensate for the lone controller_id parameter. It does clarify the core meaning via 'optionally limited to one controller'. But it omits how to obtain a valid controller_id, what format is expected, and behavior for invalid or nonexistent controller IDs. Partial compensation for a low-coverage schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List persistent writer leases') plus an optional controller filter. However, the tool name says 'owned_worker' while the description says 'persistent writer leases' — a terminology mismatch that leaves the relationship to the similarly-named herdr_lease_inventory and herdr_owned_worker_verification_list unclear. Slightly ambiguous but fundamentally clear.

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 explains one usage dimension ('optionally limited to one controller') but gives no guidance amid 43 siblings about when to call this versus herdr_lease_inventory, which appears to overlap in domain, or herdr_owned_worker_verification_list. No exclusions or alternative routing are given despite strong overlap potential.

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