saos_list_courts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the output structure (ID, name, type) and the fact that it returns a list. Since it's a simple read-only list operation with no side effects, this is sufficient. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but they are not critical for this tool.

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 two short, focused sentences. Every word earns its place, providing the return type and usage context without any fluff.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description fully covers what is returned and when to use it, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% and the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed since no parameters exist.

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 returns a list of common courts with ID, name, and type, using a specific verb and resource. It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly mentioning its role in providing court IDs for filtering in saos_search_judgments.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use to find the court ID for filtering in saos_search_judgments.' This tells exactly when to use the tool and references a sibling tool, making the context clear.

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