list-slos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination (despite limit/offset parameters), ordering, authentication requirements, or whether results are scoped to the user's permissions. The description only states the basic action and filters, omitting important context.

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, concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without redundant or extraneous wording. Every element 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 5 parameters (all optional) and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return format, pagination behavior (e.g., default limit, offset usage), or ordering of results. While the schema documents individual parameters, the description should provide an overview of how they work together.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description summarizes the three filter parameters (query, tags, IDs) but adds no new detail beyond what the schema's individual descriptions already provide. It does not explain parameter interactions or constraints.

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 tool lists Service Level Objectives with optional filtering by query, tags, or IDs. The verb 'List' and resource 'Service Level Objectives' are specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'get-slo' (single retrieval) or 'list-hosts' (different resource).

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 browsing SLOs with filters but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-slo' for individual SLOs or 'list-slo-corrections' for corrections. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are mentioned.

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