tm1_list_cubes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it discloses nothing beyond 'List cubes.' It does not state whether control cubes are included by default, what the output looks like, whether pagination exists, or any side effects/safety characteristics.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It contains no information beyond what the tool name already conveys and therefore does not earn its place in the definition.

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?

For a tool with one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should at least clarify what the returned cube list contains and how includeControl affects it. 'List cubes' leaves too many basic call-time questions unanswered.

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 only parameter, includeControl, has no description in the schema and schema coverage is 0%, so the description needed to explain it; it does not. The parameter name is mildly self-explanatory and optional, which keeps this above the lowest score, but the agent receives no real semantic guidance.

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 states the action and resource ('List cubes'), so a caller can tell it is a listing operation for cubes. However, it essentially restates the tool name and provides no scope, return-format, or filtering details, so it does not reach the level of a well-specified purpose.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings like tm1_list_dimensions or tm1_list_views beyond the object type in the name. No mention of the optional includeControl parameter or any exclusions, so an agent cannot decide confidently between alternatives from the description alone.

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