list_agent_clients

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. Description adds auth requirement (requires RATARY_API_KEY) and return format (JSON list, no side effects), going beyond annotations.

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?

Four concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, then attributes, usage guidance, and return info.

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 parameterless list tool with comprehensive annotations and no output schema, description covers auth, idempotency, return format, and usage guidance completely.

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?

No parameters, schema coverage is 100%, and baseline for 0 parameters is 4. Description implicitly confirms it is parameterless; no additional info needed.

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?

Clearly states it lists certified external agent client profiles, including specific fields (name, transport, status). Distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating not for memory CRUD or retrieval.

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?

Explicitly says to use for ecosystem/discovery questions about supported clients and provides clear alternatives (save_memory, search_memory, get_context) for other use cases.

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