airflow-list-dags

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only restates the default active state and filters, but omits behavioral traits like pagination (limit parameter), ordering, or any side effects. The description adds minimal value over the schema.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. There is no wasted content, and every word serves a purpose.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about return values, pagination behavior, or error conditions, leaving the agent without enough context to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 description coverage is high (75%), and the description reiterates the filter parameters without adding new meaning. It does not explain the 'limit' parameter or provide additional context beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'Airflow DAGs', with explicit defaults and filters. It distinguishes from siblings like 'airflow-list-runs' which lists runs, and 'airflow-trigger-dag' which triggers DAGs.

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 usage for listing DAGs with optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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