list_liveviews

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only list operation but does not mention permissions, pagination, scope limits, or what happens if the host is invalid or has no liveviews. The behavioral information is minimal.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler, and the primary action is front-loaded. The host parameter clarification is placed directly where it is most useful.

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 simple with one parameter and has an output schema, so return-value details are covered elsewhere. However, the description lacks usage guidance and behavioral details such as read-only confirmation or response characteristics, leaving some gaps given the absence of annotations.

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 meaningful semantics by listing accepted formats: console name, ID, or composite ID (MAC:numericId format). This substantially helps the agent supply a valid value despite 0% schema description coverage.

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 clear verb ('List'), a specific resource ('liveviews'), and a scope ('on a Protect console'). This differentiates it from single-item operations like get_liveview, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling list tools such as list_viewers.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_liveview, create_liveview, or list_viewers. It only describes what the tool does and the meaning of the host parameter, without any contextual cues or exclusions.

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