openmausbot_list_bots

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by disclosing that soul text is omitted unless explicitly requested, which informs the agent about default response size and content. No contradiction with annotations.

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 one tight, front-loaded sentence. It states the action first and then the key behavioral qualifier, with zero 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?

This is a simple list tool with one optional parameter, a read-only annotation profile, and an output schema available. The description covers the tool's purpose, the key default behavior, and the parameter's effect, which is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. It directly explains the include_soul parameter by stating soul text is excluded unless explicitly requested, giving the boolean parameter practical semantics beyond the schema's bare title.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List bots') and adds a meaningful behavioral qualifier about excluding long soul text by default. It is clearly distinct from sibling list tools like list_routines or list_webhooks.

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 implies the tool is for listing bots but gives no explicit guidance about when to choose it over alternatives or when not to use it. The parameter hint ('unless explicitly requested') provides context, but no sibling comparisons or exclusions are mentioned.

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