pool_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by mentioning 'Paginated envelope' and clarifying 'target' usage from config.yaml. It doesn't contradict annotations and adds value.

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 brief and front-loaded with purpose. It includes a concise Args section without redundancy. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's behavior or parameters.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, args, pagination, and target selection. It lists returned fields and mentions pagination, though 'Paginated envelope' is slightly vague. Overall, it's complete for the tool's complexity.

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 only provides names, types, and defaults. The description explains each parameter meaningfully: limit as page size, offset as page offset, and target as Horizon target from config with a default behavior. This fully compensates for the absence of 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 starts with '[READ] List Horizon desktop pools' which clearly states the verb and resource, and enumerates specific fields (id, name, type, enabled, assignment). It distinguishes itself from siblings like pool_get by using 'List' (plural) and from app_pool_list by specifying 'desktop pools'.

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?

It explicitly identifies the tool as 'the verify pair for pool_set_enabled and pool_push_image', giving a concrete use case. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the purpose and sibling list imply pool_get is for single-pool details. This is clear but not exhaustive.

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