list_components

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. Being a 'list' operation implies read-only behavior, but there's no description of pagination, return format, or whether the output is exhaustive. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the verb itself.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence with zero waste. It states the action, the resource, and the optional filter in one clear sentence.

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 tool has an output schema that explains return values, and the input is a single well-documented optional parameter with 100% coverage. For a simple filtered-list tool, the description is nearly sufficient, but it lacks behavioral details like pagination or ordering that would round out completeness for a list operation.

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% and the kind parameter is well-documented with the allowed enum values listed in the schema itself. The description adds the 'optional' clarifying note in prose ('optionally filtered'), reinforcing what the schema already states via default: null.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'List all Components, optionally filtered by kind.' It states the resource (Components) and the optional filtering capability. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools, but the name and scope are reasonably self-evident.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies list-related usage but doesn't state when to prefer this over alternative listing tools like list_repos, list_tasks, or list_governance_entities. No exclusions or alternatives named.

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