List programs & run stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the data source ('Sourced from the controller config'), but does not mention read-only nature, permissions, rate limits, or whether the data is real-time. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand tool behavior.

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 front-loads the main purpose and adds a source note. It is concise but could be improved with bullet points for the listed fields or more structured formatting; still, it is effective and wastes no 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists all returned fields and their source. It is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns, though without an output schema, it relies entirely on the description for return value understanding.

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%, covering the controllerId parameter's optionality conditions. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 verb (List), the resource (watering programs), and enumerates the specific fields returned, including last start/finish, duration, water used, next scheduled start/finish, and assigned zones. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like baseline_get_history or baseline_list_zones by specifying exactly what program-related information is provided.

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 by listing the data returned and mentioning the controller source, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like baseline_get_history or baseline_get_live. No prerequisites or conditions are stated beyond the parameter dependency on a controller.

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