List Features

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, indicating safe read behavior. The description adds value by detailing the return content (unified list, install status), without contradicting 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?

Two sentences cover purpose, scope, and usage context with no redundant words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what it returns (unified list, install status) and gives an example. Could be slightly more detailed about output structure, but is sufficient.

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?

The input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific information, which is appropriate. Baseline score of 3 is maintained.

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', the resource 'features', and adds specifics about returning a unified list of IDM and AIC platform features with install status. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like installIdmFeature and validateIdmFeature by stating it is the single tool for checking feature existence and state.

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 says 'This is the single tool to call when checking what features exist and their state,' providing clear context for when to use it. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives, the statement implies its unique role among feature-related siblings.

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