list_realtime_livestreams

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the operation ('List') and provides no information about pagination, response shape, read-only guarantees, account/app scoping behavior, or any limits. The verb implies non-mutation, but the description adds no transparency beyond that.

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 a single, concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It communicates the action and object efficiently, though it is slightly under-specified in behavioral detail.

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 list operation with fully documented required parameters, the description is minimally viable. However, the lack of annotations, output schema, and usage guidance means the agent must infer pagination and return-format expectations from the verb alone.

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 fully documents both required parameters (account_id and app_id). The description adds no extra parameter semantics, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a clear verb ('List') and names a specific resource ('Realtime Kit livestreams'), which differentiates it from the singular get_realtime_livestream and from related realtime listing tools. It does not fully explain scope or what qualifies as a livestream, but the core purpose is 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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_realtime_livestream, list_realtime_apps, or list_realtime_sessions. With a large sibling list that includes several realtime list/get tools, the agent receives no decision criteria.

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