list_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions search criteria and a default limit but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, cache behavior, pagination, or rate limits. Additionally, the default limit in the description conflicts with the schema, further reducing transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence. It is concise but contains an inaccuracy regarding the default limit, which 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?

Given the tool has 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain force_refresh, repository filtering, pagination behavior, or the actual default limit. An agent cannot fully understand how to use the tool without inspecting the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description only explains three parameters (category, name, path_contains) and partially explains limit (with a wrong default). It omits force_refresh, repository_owner, repository_name, and repository_branch entirely. Thus, the description adds minimal semantic value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists Microsoft Sentinel tools and utilities and allows searching by category, name, or file path. It differentiates from sibling tools like list_detections and list_workbooks by specifying 'tools and utilities'. However, there is a minor inconsistency: the description mentions 'Returns max 100 results by default' but the schema default for limit is 1000.

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 via search capabilities but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it specify when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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