astrovisor_openapi_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a listing operation with pagination and optional filters, implying a read-only behavior. This sufficiently communicates the primary behavioral trait, though it does not strictly state that it is idempotent or safe.

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 unnecessary words. It front-loads the primary action and includes key features (pagination, filters). Every word earns its place.

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 complexity (5 optional parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not specify the return format (e.g., array of operations, metadata) or ordering. With no output schema, the agent may need additional context about the result structure.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions in the schema. The description adds a high-level summary ('pagination and optional filters') but no additional semantic detail beyond what each parameter's description already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool lists OpenAPI operations, with pagination and filters. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like astrovisor_openapi_get (single operation) and astrovisor_openapi_search (search). It identifies a specific verb and resource.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus siblings like astrovisor_openapi_search or astrovisor_openapi_get. It lacks context on when to prefer pagination vs search, and no when-not or prerequisites are mentioned.

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