list_software_installs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so safety and mutability are covered. The description adds only the returned attribute set and says nothing about pagination behavior or how the free-form "query" parameter interacts with the structured filters.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient but so terse that it leaves little room for routing or behavioral detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description is the only place to learn what a record looks like, and it names three fields only. It omits filtering guidance, default page size context, and any mention of how results relate to discovery runs or devices.

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 all five parameters (limit, query, product, publisher, unlicensed_only) are already documented. The description loosely echoes publisher and license status but adds no semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 ("List discovered software installations") and adds the attributes surfaced (publisher, version, license status). However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as get_software_install, list_software_products, or list_software_licenses.

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?

Usage is only implied: "discovered" installations suggests discovery-sourced records rather than software models or license positions. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus get_software_install (single-record fetch) or list_software_products.

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