List live streams

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description layers on facts the annotations cannot carry: an auth prerequisite ("Requires the key to be valid"), a concrete rate limit ("60 requests per hour ... shared across every tool in the ws-ticket group"), budget contention with stream opening, and the non-obvious behavior that streams cannot be read via a tool call at all.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then constraints, and every sentence carries information (discovery-only framing, auth, rate limit, caching). It runs slightly long with three separate short constraint sentences, but there is no filler or repetition.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema and a safety profile already covered by annotations, the description supplies exactly the missing pieces an agent needs: that this is discovery-only, how to actually read the data, auth requirements, and the shared rate budget.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no arguments whose semantics the description could enrich, and it correctly avoids inventing parameter guidance where none is needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("The live streams this deployment serves and the scope each needs") and immediately carves out what it is not: "Discovery only — a stream is a long-lived connection and cannot be read through a tool call." This clearly separates it from siblings like list_bots, list_orders and the rest of the listing family.

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?

Explicitly prescribes when to use it ("use this to find out what exists") and the alternative path ("read the same data through the list tools"), plus a caching directive ("Read it once; it does not change while a key lives"). Nothing about routing is left to inference.

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