protect_list_arm_profiles

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: availability constraint (local alarm manager), and response uncertainty (unverified shape, suggests inspecting live). Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive.

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?

Concise two-sentence description front-loaded with main purpose. Second sentence is lengthy but contains necessary warnings. Could be slightly more compact but still effective.

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 zero parameters, read-only annotations, and the presence of an output schema (even if not fully verified), the description provides sufficient context about usage context and expected fields, with a practical suggestion to inspect live response.

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 exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds no parameter info because none needed. Schema coverage is 100% trivially.

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 arm profiles and distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying the context (local alarm manager only). Uses verb 'List' and resource 'arm profiles'.

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?

Specifies when to use (only with local alarm manager) and warns about unverified response shape. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is clear given sibling tools are for different entities.

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