list_access

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description is consistent with that. It adds that the listing is specific to the host's configured access entities, but no additional behavioral details beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary 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?

The tool is a simple read-only listing with no parameters and an output schema. The description provides sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema fully covers parameter semantics (100% coverage). The description does not need to add parameter details. Per rubric, baseline 4 for 0 params.

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 users, groups, roles, and resource pools on the host. This is a specific verb and resource set, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like list_networks and list_guests.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the description implies its purpose as the access-listing tool among the sibling group. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives.

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