list_packages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the return format and mentions status, error messages, and the default ADOM, but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The behavior is adequately described for a list operation.

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 well-structured with a summary, context, Args, Returns, and an Example. The explanation of policy packages is slightly verbose but adds useful context. Overall, it is concise and well-organized.

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 simplicity of the tool (list with one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema (implied), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, what parameters to use, and what is returned, including error handling and an example.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds full semantic meaning for the 'adom' parameter, including default behavior (from env var or 'root'). This compensates completely for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'List all policy packages in an ADOM' with a specific verb and resource, and explains what policy packages are. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_package or get_package.

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 it lists all packages in an ADOM, but does not explicitly provide guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., get_package for a single package) or mention any exclusions.

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