farm_list

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by marking the tool '[READ]', confirming pagination, and explaining the 'target' parameter's source from config.yaml and the default behavior. This is meaningful supplementary information without contradicting the annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a front-loaded [READ] marker, a one-sentence summary of output fields, and a concise args list. Every line provides necessary information with no redundancy or filler.

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 operation without an output schema, the description provides complete context: the resource type, returned attributes, pagination, and optional target selection. Combined with robust annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), the description fully covers what an agent needs to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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 provides only names and defaults, with 0% schema description coverage. The description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: 'limit' as page size (default 50), 'offset' as page offset, and 'target' as an optional Horizon target from config.yaml with an omission default. This adds clear semantic value beyond the structured schema.

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 Horizon RDS farms with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Horizon RDS farms'), enumerating the returned fields (id, name, type, enabled, RDS server count) and the pagination behavior. This differentiates it from sibling list tools like machine_list and pool_list by focusing explicitly on RDS farms.

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 when to use this tool: to retrieve a paginated list of RDS farms, with clear field-level expectations. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the resource-specific wording and the 'target' config context provide sufficient guidance without needing exclusions.

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