list_glossaries

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

No annotations are available, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, side effects, or return format. For a read operation, it fails to inform the agent about pagination behavior or any constraints.

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 that is concise and avoids redundancy. However, it could be slightly expanded to include parameter hints or return information without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format, filtering options, or how pagination works. The agent needs more context to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, meaning the AI must rely solely on the description for parameter understanding. The description only mentions 'pagination and filtering' but does not explain individual parameters like limit, offset, fields, or include_deleted. The defaults and types are in the schema, but without semantic context, the agent may misuse parameters.

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 it lists glossaries from OpenMetadata and mentions pagination and filtering. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other list tools (e.g., list_glossary_terms) beyond the entity type, which is implicit. A more explicit comparison would improve clarity.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_glossary, get_glossary_by_name, or list_glossary_terms. The description does not mention prerequisites or context, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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