list_parsers

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

The description claims a default max of 100 results, but the input schema shows a limit parameter with default 1000. This is a clear contradiction that misinforms the agent. No annotations are present to compensate.

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 concise sentence that states the core function and search options. However, the inaccuracy about the limit default detracts from its effectiveness.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers search functionality and a default limit (though wrong), but omits details about output format, pagination, or ordering. It is adequate but not complete for a list tool.

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 indicated as 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic context for search fields (solution, name, query_contains, path_contains) but inaccurately describes the limit default, reducing its value.

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 states the tool lists Microsoft Sentinel parsers (KQL functions) and mentions search capabilities by multiple criteria. It is specific but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_functions.

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 implies usage when needing to search parsers by solution, name, query content, or file path, but provides no guidance on when not to use or alternatives.

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