list_authorities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read operation by using 'List' but does not mention if records are ordered, paginated, or filtered, nor does it clarify the scope of 'included public matters'.

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 sentence that immediately communicates the core function. It is concise, but could be slightly more informative (e.g., clarifying 'Obligation-First') without becoming verbose.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema. However, it lacks details about what each record contains, the return format, and the meaning of 'Obligation-First' and 'included public matters,' leaving some ambiguity.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-related information, which is acceptable. Baseline score of 3 applies as there is nothing to add.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists authority records with specific qualifiers (Obligation-First, from included public matters). The verb 'List' and resource 'authority records' are explicit, and the qualifiers distinguish it from sibling tools like get_authority (single record) and list_records (general records).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_authority or search_records. The description only states what it does, omitting any mention of scenarios or exclusions.

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