sigsci_list_rate_limited_ips

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states the action (list) without any information on side effects, read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotations.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and concise. However, it may be too brief to convey essential context, but for conciseness alone it scores well.

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 simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits important context such as what fields are returned, pagination behavior, or whether it lists all rate-limited IPs globally or for a specific scope. The tool's complexity is low, but the description still lacks completeness for a new user.

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 coverage is 100% for the three parameters (corpName, siteName, limit). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No additional semantic value provided.

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-resource pair ('List rate-limited IPs for a site'), clearly identifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sigsci_list_suspicious_ips (different IP type) and sigsci_list_agents (different resource).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sigsci_list_suspicious_ips or other list tools). No mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions. The description provides no context for selection among siblings.

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