list-apm-retention-filters

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

No behavioral traits beyond listing are disclosed. There is no mention of return format, pagination, or whether all filters are listed. Since annotations are absent, the description carries full burden but only states the basic function.

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 sentence that is clear and concise. Every word adds value, and it is 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 is a simple list operation, the description is largely complete. A small improvement would be to mention that it returns a list of all filters, but overall it is adequate.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. With 100% schema description coverage and zero parameters, baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info, which is appropriate.

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 action 'List' and the resource 'APM retention filters', and explains their purpose 'that control which traces are retained for search'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get, create, delete, and update.

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 when needing to view all retention filters, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get-apm-retention-filter (for a single filter) or create/update/delete. No exclusions or context are mentioned.

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