list_queues

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation, so the annotation carries most of the safety signal. The description adds only the vague qualifier 'available' and does not clarify behavior such as whether disabled queues are included, pagination, ordering, or access-based filtering.

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 a single clear phrase with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core operation and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 list operation with one optional parameter and a read-only annotation, the description is minimally viable. However, the meaning of 'available' is ambiguous and there is no mention of output shape or default field behavior, which matters because no output schema exists.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the 'fields' parameter is well documented in the schema, including the notable replacement behavior. The description adds no parameter-level information, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully compensates.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('queues'), clearly identifying it as an enumeration operation. It is distinguishable from get_queue (single queue) but does not explicitly name that sibling or define what 'available' means.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_queue or search-related tools. The phrase 'all available queues' implies a general listing scenario, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternative tool references.

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