list_published_agents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable scoping context ('apenas agentes publicados do tenant') beyond what annotations provide, but does not disclose details such as pagination, ordering, or response structure. This is acceptable for a simple list tool, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 consists of two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The first sentence identifies the action and resource, and the second adds the critical published-only scope. Every word earns its place.

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 parameterless, read-only list tool with rich annotations, the description provides all necessary invocation context: what is listed, what scope is returned, and the tenant boundary. There is no missing information that would prevent an agent from calling it 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 input schema has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema imposes no burden. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description correctly adds no unnecessary parameter details.

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 a specific action ('Lista') on a specific resource ('agentes disponíveis para conversa') and further narrows the scope with 'Retorna apenas agentes publicados do tenant.' This distinguishes it from siblings like list_agents by emphasizing the published-only filter.

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: use this tool when you need published agents available for conversation, scoped to the tenant. It does not explicitly name an alternative like list_agents for non-published agents, but the 'apenas agentes publicados' phrasing makes the intended use case reasonably clear.

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