list_sirens

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It explicitly discloses the HTTP method GET, signaling a read-only operation, and mentions the Fabric proxy path. It does not detail pagination, auth requirements, or error behavior, but for this simple list operation the disclosed method and scope are meaningful.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The action and endpoint are front-loaded, and the only parameter explanation is compact and directly attached to the relevant field.

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 has one required parameter, an output schema, and no complex nested behavior. The description supplies the endpoint, the host identifier options, and the scope of the listing, which is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 essential semantics: host may be a console name, ID, or composite ID in MAC:numericId format. This fully compensates for the 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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List sirens on a Protect console', and reinforces it with the exact endpoint 'GET /v1/sirens'. This clearly distinguishes it from singular/action siblings like get_siren or siren_play.

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?

It states the clear context for when to use this tool: to enumerate all sirens on a particular Protect console, identified by the required host parameter. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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