List Migration Plans

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether results are paginated or sorted, or how large the returned set may be — only the vague word "persisted" hints at storage semantics.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be maximally useful given the crowded migration sibling group.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a simple parameterless list tool this is minimally adequate, but it omits scope relative to the many related migration-plan tools, leaving the agent to guess whether "all" is global or filtered.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and per the baseline for parameterless tools that is not a defect. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the absence of filtering, which is implicit in "all".

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?

Specific verb+resource ("List ... migration plans"), and the modifier "persisted" signals it reads stored plans rather than generating or analyzing them. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby get_migration_plan or ai_generate_migration_plan siblings, so an agent must infer the list-vs-single distinction.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus get_migration_plan, create_migration_plan, or ai_generate_migration_plan, all of which appear in the sibling set. Usage is only implied by the verb "List".

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