trawl_agents_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the whole burden. 'List available' implies a safe read, but it says nothing about result volume, pagination, ordering, or what an 'agent template' actually contains, and there is no output schema to fill that 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?

One short sentence with the resource front-loaded and the optional modifier trailing; nothing is wasted, though it is arguably too thin rather than optimally sized.

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 tool is simple (one optional param, no nested objects), so a single sentence is close to sufficient. But with no annotations and no output schema, the agent gets no signal about return shape or whether the list can be large.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as 'Filter by tag'. The description merely restates that the filter is optional, adding no syntax, matching behavior, or case-sensitivity detail 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (agent templates) with an optional filter. It is distinguishable from trawl_agents_get and trawl_run_agent by the enumeration framing, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by tag' implies the discovery use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over trawl_agents_get or trawl_run_agent, nor any prerequisite or exclusion stated.

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