list_soap_messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful domain context—outbound SOAP messages from sys_soap_message and the function-level endpoint model—but does not describe return shape, pagination, or filtering behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool's core purpose front-loaded and a useful data-model caveat second. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description gives enough context to select and invoke it. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists and the list operation is straightforward; the endpoint-location note covers the main ambiguity.

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%, so both limit and query are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add syntax or filtering details beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation when the schema fully covers parameters.

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 and resource: lists outbound SOAP Message configurations from sys_soap_message. It also clarifies a key distinction from SOAP message functions by noting that endpoints live on each function, not the message, so an agent can distinguish it from list_soap_message_functions and get_soap_message.

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 note that endpoints live on each function rather than the message gives clear contextual guidance and implicitly steers endpoint lookup away from this tool. However, it does not explicitly name list_soap_message_functions as the alternative, so the guidance is clear but not fully specified.

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