list_scouts

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds the context that it returns basic metadata, but does not disclose additional behavioral details like authentication requirements or rate limits.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundant or extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 optional params, output schema exists), the description covers the core purpose and differentiator. However, it omits guidance on pagination and status filtering, which would be beneficial for an agent to use 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?

The description does not elaborate on any of the three parameters (limit, cursor, status). With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to infer filtering and pagination behavior from parameter names alone.

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 'List all scouts for the authenticated user,' specifying the verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_scout_detail' by noting it returns basic metadata, aiding differentiation.

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 implicitly guides usage by contrasting with get_scout_detail for full fields. However, it does not mention when to use alternatives like filtering by status or pagination, leaving some ambiguity about the tool's full scope.

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