protect_list_arm_profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe read. The description adds value by specifying the availability condition (local alarm manager) and the structure of the returned array, which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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 sentence that packs essential info, but the inclusion of '7.1.83 docs' adds slight noise. Otherwise, it is front-loaded with the purpose and condition, making it 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, read-only list), the description covers the necessary context: when to use, what it returns, and the field details. It lacks mention of empty result or error cases, but those are not critical for a basic list tool with good annotations.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is effectively 100% (empty schema). Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter information. It focuses on the output, which is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'arm profiles', and distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's only available with the local alarm manager, not Protect cloud alerts. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from other list tools.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (only when using the local alarm manager) and implicitly when not to use it (Protect cloud alerts). No alternative tool is mentioned, but the condition is clear enough to guide the agent.

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