list_broker_services

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. 'List' implies read-only, and it specifies the output includes bound queues. However, it does not mention permissions, whether system services are included, or any error conditions. This is acceptable for a simple list but not exhaustive.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that covers the action, resource, scope, and output in a clear, efficient manner with no wasted words.

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?

Given the simple nature (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is largely sufficient: it states what is listed (services) and what is returned (bound queues). It could be more explicit about the result set shape, but for a catalog listing this is adequate.

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 already fully describes the single parameter (database name with default behavior), so the description adds no extra meaning. Baseline 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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 clearly states the action (List), the resource (Service Broker services), the scope (in a database), and an additional detail (the queue each binds to). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_service_queues and covers the essential 'what'.

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 usage is implied by the description—listing broker services—but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of exclusions. For a straightforward list tool, this is adequate but not highly instructive.

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