list_simulators

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states a read-only listing operation which is transparent, but it does not detail the return format, what 'available' means, or any dependencies like Xcode. The description is not misleading, but it lacks depth.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key capability. No redundant words or phrases, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 listing tool with four optional parameters fully covered by schema, the description is adequate. It does not explain the return structure, but the absence of an output schema is offset by the tool's straightforward nature. Could mention defaults or examples, but current completeness is good.

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 fully documents all four parameters with descriptions and enums, so the description's mention of 'filtering options' adds no extra semantic value. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is 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 specific verb 'List' and a clear resource 'all available iOS simulators', which distinguishes it from the sibling 'list_booted_simulators' tool. It also mentions filtering options, indicating the tool's scope.

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 implies usage by stating 'all available' and 'filtering options', but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like 'list_booted_simulators' or state when not to use this tool. General context is clear, but exclusions are absent.

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