mattermost_list_teams

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

Because no annotations are provided, the description must carry the full burden. The phrase 'currently accessible to the user' hints that results are permission-scoped, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. It does not mention pagination, result ordering, failure modes when the user is unauthenticated, or the shape of each returned team.

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?

It is one short sentence with no wasted wording, and the scope qualifier comes before the noun it modifies. The sentence is minimal, but it is not padded; this is a case of appropriate brevity rather than vague wording.

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?

This is a simple zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, so the bar is lower. Still, an agent cannot tell from the description whether the result is paginated, whether an empty list means no membership, or which identifier it should reuse in later calls.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description correctly implies that no input is required and that the scope is derived from the authenticated session, indicating there are no filters to apply.

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 names a specific verb and resource (list teams) and scopes it to teams the current user can access. Because it is clearly a list tool, it is distinguishable from siblings such as mattermost_list_channels or mattermost_search_posts. However, it does not state that it is distinct from those siblings.

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 gives no guidance on when to call this tool instead of other tools, or what to do afterward. It does not say that the returned team identifiers are needed by channel-related tools, and it gives no prerequisites and no exclusion criteria.

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