protect_list_relays

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds value by detailing the return fields (id, modelKey, name, etc.), which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not mention any potential limits, pagination, or other behavioral details.

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 two-sentence description is extremely concise and front-loaded. It begins with the primary action and then lists return fields. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 simple read-only list tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description is mostly complete. It names all relay fields. However, it could mention whether the list is exhaustive or if any pagination applies, though this is minor.

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 trivially 100%. Per guidelines, 0 params gives a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter info, and it correctly omits unnecessary detail.

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 'List all relays' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like protect_get_relay which likely gets a single relay. The exact resource and scope are unambiguous.

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 (to get all relays) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like protect_get_relay. No when-not guidance or exclusion criteria are provided.

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