list_terminals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a read-only operation but lacks any details about side effects, permissions required, or what 'registered' means. The simplicity of the tool prevents a lower score but the omission of behavioral nuance is notable.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the purpose. Every word earns its place 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 parameterless tool, the description provides the minimum viable information. However, it fails to explain what a terminal is in this context, what the output contains (no output schema), or how it relates to sibling tools like 'send_message'. The simplicity of the tool modestly compensates.

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 has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline of 4 is appropriate; it does not detract but also does not enhance understanding.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'terminals'. It is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_messages', which also lists resources, missing an opportunity to clarify the domain scope.

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 instructions on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'register' or 'get_messages'. Without context, an AI agent may not know that terminals must be listed before sending messages, for example.

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