list_report_definitions

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), the description discloses the paginated envelope structure, notes that total can be null, and warns to 'Check truncated before calling this the complete set.' This adds meaningful behavioral detail that annotations don't cover.

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 well-structured: purpose, return envelope, then args. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the core action and uses a clean Args block for parameter details.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, how to use results (generate_report), the return envelope, and all parameters. Annotations cover safety, so no further disclaimers are needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries full responsibility. It does so excellently: name_filter is described as 'Substring filter on report name (case-insensitive)', limit includes range and default, target is explained as 'Aria target name from config; default when omitted.' This fully compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 'List available report definition templates in Aria Operations' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning 'templates' and linking to generate_report, so an agent knows this is for definitions, not generated reports.

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 provides clear downstream usage guidance: 'Pass a returned id to generate_report to run one.' It implies when to use this tool (when you need templates) but doesn't explicitly contrast with list_reports or list_alert_definitions, so it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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