list_nests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation with potentially large results. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies this is an admin action, requires Application API key, and describes the return format (nest ID, name, author, description). It doesn't mention rate limits or pagination, but provides useful operational context.

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 efficiently structured in three sentences: purpose statement with explanation, return value specification, and usage guidance with prerequisites. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or wasted words.

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 read-only tool with no parameters and good annotations, the description provides excellent context about purpose, output format, and prerequisites. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from more detail about response structure (e.g., pagination, error cases). The admin action and API key requirements are well-covered.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline would be 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since there are none, which is correct for this tool. It focuses instead on the tool's purpose and output.

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 resource ('all nests (egg categories)'), specifies it's an admin action, explains what nests are with examples, and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning related tools (list_eggs, get_egg). It goes beyond just restating the name.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('to find specific server templates' via nest ID with list_eggs or get_egg) and mentions it's an admin action requiring Application API key. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or compare with the sibling 'get_nest' tool.

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