list_chimes

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

With no annotations provided, the description's read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'List' rather than stated. It does add a scoping behavior ('on a Protect console') and explains the host identifier formats, but it does not mention side effects, permissions, or response 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 two sentences with no filler. The primary function is front-loaded, and the parameter explanation is placed immediately after, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the function, scope, and parameter format. It could mention whether get_chime is more appropriate for a single chime, but that is a usage guideline gap, not a completeness gap.

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 schema only defines 'host' as a string, but the description adds critical meaning by stating it accepts 'console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format)'. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage and tells an agent exactly what values are valid.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('chimes'), and a location ('on a Protect console'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_chime and update_chime, which operate on a single chime or modify it.

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 phrase 'List all chimes' implies the tool is for enumerating chimes rather than fetching or updating one, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_chime or update_chime, nor does it provide exclusions. This is adequate but left to inference.

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