list_agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It indicates a read-only listing operation ('List all available...') but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, or limitations (e.g., whether only agents accessible to the current user are returned). For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 that is clear and free of filler. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose.

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 output schema exists and the tool has no parameters, the description is largely complete. It might benefit from a note about the structure of the returned list, but the output schema likely covers that. The description focuses on the 'what' without overspecifying.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but none are needed. The phrase 'all available' clarifies scope.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('all available SkySQL DB agents'), and the additional detail ('with their capabilities'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_services, which lists services, and ask_agent, which likely interacts with an agent.

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 such as list_services or ask_agent. The description implies a simple listing operation but does not mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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