List Cas Servers

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the 'available' qualifier, implying some status filtering, but gives no context about authorization, ordering, or result behavior beyond what the output schema likely provides.

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 with no redundant filler. It communicates the action, resource, and scope efficiently.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list operation with a full output schema and safety annotations, the description provides enough context for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. No additional procedural detail is necessary.

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 accepts zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics the description must explain. Baseline for a zero-parameter tool 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') with a concrete resource ('available CAS servers') and scopes it to the Viya environment. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_caslibs and list_castables, which target different CAS objects.

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 guidance is provided about when to call this tool rather than alternatives such as list_compute_contexts or list_caslibs. The description states only the function, not the conditions or exclusions.

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