list_endpoints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List registered endpoints' implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify whether this returns all endpoints or filtered results, what format the output takes, or any limitations (like pagination or rate limits). The description is too minimal for a tool with no annotation support.

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 maximally concise - a single four-word phrase that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's perfectly front-loaded with the essential information.

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?

Given the tool has zero parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description's minimalism is partially justified. However, for a tool with no annotations and multiple related sibling tools, the description should provide more context about what 'endpoints' are and how this listing differs from other list operations in the system.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the input requirements. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and appropriately doesn't attempt to. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 action ('List') and resource ('registered endpoints'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_mimic_profiles' or explain what distinguishes 'endpoints' from other listable resources in this context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools (add_endpoint, remove_endpoint, clear_endpoints) that relate to endpoints, but no indication of when listing is appropriate versus modifying endpoints.

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