list_radius_profiles

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination mechanics (native default page size 25, drain all pages), return format ({data, totalCount}), manual page override semantics, and the 'capped drain' incomplete flag. This is thorough and goes well beyond what a schema would convey.

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?

Compact yet information-dense. Each sentence serves a purpose: first defines scope, second explains parameter formats, third and fourth detail pagination behavior and manual overrides. No filler or repetition.

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 list operation with no annotations, the description covers necessary context: target resource, required identifiers, pagination, return structure, and incomplete-drain signaling. Output schema exists, so return details don't need duplication. Everything an agent needs to correctly invoke and interpret results is present.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining host formats (console name, ID, composite ID) and site formats (name or ID), plus the behavioral meaning of offset/limit. All four parameters are effectively documented.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('RADIUS profiles') scoped to a site, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_radius_profile (single-profile fetch) and create_radius_profile (write operation). The resource and scope are unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on pagination behavior and how to request a single manual page (pass offset or limit). It explains the default drain behavior and return shape. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative sibling tools (e.g., when to use list vs get), but the scope is clear enough that the intended use is well understood.

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