get_agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it lists agents and supports pagination/filtering/sorting, but does not explicitly declare read-only behavior, auth requirements, rate limits, or potential network latency. The description is clear but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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 listing tool with 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key capabilities and return fields. It lacks details on empty results, error handling, or rate limits, but given the complexity and sibling context, it is fairly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds a high-level statement about supporting pagination, filtering, and sorting, but does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the tool lists AI agents and returns configuration details including voice, LLM model, language settings, and call statistics. It specifies support for pagination, filtering, and sorting, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_agent (single agent) and get_agent_performance.

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 for listing agents but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_agent for a single agent. No when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned, but the context of sibling tools makes it somewhat clear.

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