list_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only discloses newest-first ordering; it does not clarify read-only/non-destructive behavior, pagination, permissions, or return shape, even though the schema covers paging parameters.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the action, resource scope, and ordering with no filler. It is terse but structurally efficient.

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 3-parameter list tool with full schema coverage, the description is adequate to know it lists all service types newest first. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves gaps around return shape and when to choose it over list_models, list_databases, or get_service.

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 100%, so limit, cursor, and status are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail, which is acceptable under the baseline-3 rule when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the specific verb 'List' and resource 'services', parenthetically scopes services to apps, models, and databases, and specifies newest-first ordering. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as list_models, list_databases, or get_service, so it falls short of full sibling routing.

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 gives no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or named alternatives. With many sibling tools for listing models/databases and getting service detail, the agent must infer that this is the broad discovery tool.

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