list_signals

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It indicates a read operation ('list') but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether 'active' status is defined, pagination, or any side effects. Output schema helps but description could add more context.

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 concise sentence of 10 words with no wasted information, perfectly front-loaded.

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 the simple tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand its basic operation.

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%, but the description explains the sole parameter 'active_only' by stating 'optionally filtering to active-only,' which adds meaning beyond the schema's boolean type and default value.

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 all configured signals with an optional filter. The verb 'list' and resource 'signals' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, update, and check signals.

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 usage for listing signals but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like check_signals_now or other query tools. No when-not or exclusions are stated.

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