list_agents_with_commands

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action (list agents that support remote command execution) but omits any details about side effects, permissions required, rate limits, or return value structure. The lack of behavioral context is a significant gap for agent decision-making.

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 exceptionally concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second documents the single parameter. Every word is functional, with no redundancy.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and parameter meaning. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, which are important for contextual completeness given the number of sibling tools.

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 input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description adds meaning by explaining the 'server' parameter: 'which configured server to target (default active/default).' This clarifies the parameter's role and default behavior, compensating for the schema's lack of documentation.

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's purpose: 'List agents that support remote command execution.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('agents that support remote command execution'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_agents' (which presumably lists all agents) and 'list_agent_commands' (which lists commands for an agent).

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like 'list_agents' or 'run_agent_command'. There are no mentions of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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