list_rum_sites

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only says 'List Real User Monitoring sites' and does not mention return format, pagination, scope constraints, or any permissions. 'List' implies a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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, waste-free sentence with the operative verb and object front-loaded. It is appropriately terse for a simple list operation.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description communicates the core action but leaves the response shape and exact account scope unstated. It is minimally adequate but does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond the name and schema.

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 already documents account_id as 'The account ID' with 100% coverage, so the baseline is met. The description adds no additional meaning about how account_id influences the result set.

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 clear action ('List') and a specific resource ('Real User Monitoring sites'), expanding the RUM acronym into a meaningful object. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling get_rum_site by the list-vs-get contrast.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool instead of get_rum_site or when account-scoped listing is appropriate. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and the single account_id parameter.

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