td_list_operators

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions recursion but does not state that the tool is read-only, safe, or what happens with large datasets. Key behavioral aspects like pagination, side effects, and permission needs are omitted.

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 a single efficient sentence, front-loading the core action and key filters. It is not verbose, but could benefit from brief notes on return format or depth to be more self-contained.

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?

Given 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description lacks essential context about return values, pagination, error handling, and exact behavior of the recursion. It is too brief for an agent to fully understand invocation consequences.

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 67%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a filter summary (name, path, op_type, family) that corresponds to parameters, but does not explain parameters like max_depth or limit. The value added beyond the schema is marginal.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('Operators'), adds recursion and filtering details, and distinguishes from sibling tools like td_operator_info (single operator) and creation tools. It clearly communicates the scope and functionality.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied by the name and sibling context, but the description lacks statements like 'use this for listing, use td_operator_info for details on a single operator', leaving the agent to infer usage.

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