list_api_schemas

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

With no annotations available, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden but only repeats the action 'List'. It does not mention result format, pagination, read-only semantics, or any other behavior an agent should expect.

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?

Five words with no filler; the action, resource, and scope are front-loaded. For a trivial one-parameter list operation this is appropriately concise.

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 definition is too terse to be fully complete: it offers no return-value expectations and, more importantly, does not disambiguish from several sibling schema-listing tools. An agent selecting among list_api_schemas, list_api_shield_schemas, and list_api_gateway_schemas would need more context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the only parameter zone_id. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 states a specific action (list) and resource (API schemas) scoped to a zone, so an agent can generally understand the operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like list_api_shield_schemas and list_api_gateway_schemas, which also involve listing schemas.

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?

There is no guidance about when to prefer this tool over adjacent schema-listing tools, nor any exclusions or context. The only hint is 'for a zone', which is a scoping detail rather than a usage rule.

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