yaaif_desktop_workers_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not clarify output format, pagination behavior, authorization needs, or effects of the optional limit parameter. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the operation name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It names the action, resource, and scope efficiently. While brevity leaves gaps elsewhere, the structure itself is exemplary for a simple list tool.

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?

The description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool with confidence. It omits the meaning of 'q', the behavior of 'limit', what a desktop worker is, and what response shape to expect. Since there is no output schema or annotations, these gaps are material even for a straightforward list 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%, and the description does not explain 'q' or 'limit' beyond the raw schema types. 'limit' is inferable by name, but 'q' is opaque and receives no clarification. The description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 identifies a list operation, the resource ('desktop workers'), and the scope ('in the tenant (control-plane)'). This distinguishes it at a basic level from related sibling tools like yaaif_ops_desktop_runs_list, though it does not explicitly name or contrast those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yaaif_ops_desktop_runs_list or yaaif_desktop_tool_package_worker_status. The parenthetical '(control-plane)' gives a hint about context, but the description does not state when this listing is preferred or when another tool should be used.

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