list_baselines

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: read-only, parses local YAML only, no database or network access. It also describes error handling for failed entries, providing comprehensive transparency.

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?

Description is relatively long but efficiently front-loaded with [READ] and core action. Every sentence adds value (examples, behavior, sibling context). Minor redundancy in stating 'Takes no parameters' and 'Read-only' but overall well-structured.

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 zero-parameter read tool, description is fully complete: explains what it returns, how it works, error behavior, and relationship to siblings. Output schema existence further reduces need for return description.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline score of 4. Description explicitly states 'Takes no parameters', which is redundant but adds clarity. No additional meaning needed beyond schema.

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?

Description starts with [READ] and clearly states 'List all available compliance baselines', specifying built-in and user-imported examples. It differentiates from siblings by indicating this is the starting point to discover baseline IDs for get_baseline_rules and scan_target.

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?

Explicitly states 'Takes no parameters' and advises to use this tool first to discover valid baseline IDs for other tools like get_baseline_rules and scan_target, providing clear context for when to use this tool versus siblings.

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