list_report_definitions

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

The description starts with '[READ]' and adds behavior details beyond the annotations: name_filter is case-insensitive, limit has a range and default, target uses config defaults. These details compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 extremely concise with a clear summary line and structured Args list. No unnecessary words, and it is front-loaded with the 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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain returns. It covers all parameters and scope adequately, though it lacks mention of potential errors or prerequisites.

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 0%, so the description fully explains all 3 parameters: name_filter as optional substring (case-insensitive), limit as max 500 with default 100, target as optional config-based. This adds significant value.

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 explicitly states 'List available report definition templates in Aria Operations', providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly differentiates from siblings like list_reports (which lists generated reports) and list_alert_definitions (alert definitions).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as list_reports for actual reports. The usage is implied by the tool name and description, but no direct comparison or exclusion criteria are provided.

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