list_agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates the return fields (success, agents, count, synced_from_file) and implies a read operation (取得する). However, it does not disclose whether the operation is safe, idempotent, or requires any special permissions. No contradiction with annotations as none are provided.

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 concise, with the main purpose front-loaded. The Args/Returns structure is clear, though it uses Japanese (still appropriate for the tool's audience). No wasted words.

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 list tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description gives a useful summary including the notable 'synced_from_file' field. It lacks details on ordering or filtering but is fairly complete for its complexity. The parameter-contradiction reduces completeness slightly.

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 description identifies the single parameter 'caller_agent_id' as required (必須), but the schema marks it as optional with default null, creating a conflict. Beyond naming, it adds limited meaning. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate more, but it only provides a brief label.

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 it 'gets a list of all agents' (全エージェントの一覧を取得する), specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_agent or get_agent_status by focusing on listing all agents, including those saved to file.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., before creating an agent or checking status). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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