get_scenarios

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'get list' with no mention of side effects, permission requirements, pagination behavior, or response format. For a read operation, the lack of explicit read-only declaration is a gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. There is zero fluff, and every word adds value. It is as short as possible while remaining informative.

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 description is minimal for a tool with 3 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. It lacks information about pagination limits, filtering semantics, or expected response structure. An agent would need to open the schema to understand basic usage, but even then, broader context (e.g., what scenarios are) is absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameters (e.g., how count/offset interact or how scenario_name filters). Baseline 3 applies because schema adequately documents the 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?

The description clearly states a get operation on the resource 'list of scenarios' within the Voximplant domain. It is specific enough to distinguish from unrelated siblings like get_users or send_sms, but does not differentiate it from closely related scenario tools (e.g., update_scenario) beyond the verb.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention filtering capabilities, pagination, or any conditions that would favor this tool over others. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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