list_service_queues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It accurately states a read-only listing behavior and an optional schema filter, but it does not disclose any caveats such as system-queue inclusion, permission requirements, or result set details. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but not rich.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no redundant or vague wording. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity (two optional parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete for a straightforward listing tool. The database parameter is not mentioned in the description, but it is fully specified in the schema, so the overall context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters well. The description adds only 'optionally filtered by schema,' which is already implied by the optional schema property. No meaningful extra parameter semantics are provided beyond the schema.

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 has a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('Service Broker queues'), and a clear scope ('all ... in a database'), with an optional filter. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_broker_services or list_tables.

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 description gives clear context: use this tool when you need to list Service Broker queues, optionally filtered by schema. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource type is unambiguous enough to guide selection among siblings.

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