herdr_agents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that it lists 'live' agents, implying a filter on active/running agents, which is useful context. But it doesn't clarify pagination, ordering, or output format.

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?

Single short sentence with zero waste, front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 tool has no parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. It could note what 'live' means or what fields are returned, but for a simple list tool it suffices. However, it leaves ambiguity about whether it returns agent IDs, names, or statuses.

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?

No parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details (none exist), and schema coverage is 100%. It correctly conveys that no inputs are needed.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'List live agents'. It's specific about scope ('live agents recognised by Herdr'), which distinguishes it from herdr_agent_get (single agent) and herdr_agents siblings like herdr_agent_read. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the many other list-style siblings (herdr_panes, herdr_tabs, herdr_workspaces).

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives mentioned. It doesn't say when to call this vs herdr_agent_get for a specific agent. With 0 parameters, the use case is implied (enumerate all agents) but not stated.

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