List Decisioning Assets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that results can be narrowed by name; it says nothing about ordering, truncation at the limit, or whether an empty list is returned for an unknown filter.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope constraint ('of one kind') and the filter capability come before anything else.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and the input schema is fully described. What is missing is the relationship to the numerous type-specific sibling listers—an agent scanning this catalog has no signal for why it would choose this over list_business_rulesets or list_decision_flows.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the enum values, the default limit of 20, and the nullable substring filter are all documented in the schema. The description merely restates asset_type and filter_name at a high level and never mentions limit, so it adds essentially nothing beyond structured data.

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 (List) and resource (SAS Intelligent Decisioning content) with the scope constraint that only one asset kind is returned at a time. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the many sibling list tools (list_business_rulesets, list_decision_flows, list_lookup_tables) that appear to be type-specific variants of the same operation.

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?

'Of one kind, optionally filtered by name' implies how the tool is meant to be used, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this generic lister over a sibling like list_business_rulesets or list_decision_flows, nor any statement of prerequisites.

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