list_durable_object_namespaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' correctly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose pagination, output shape, ordering, or whether all namespaces are returned. It is minimally transparent but not detailed.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter list endpoint.

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?

The description is functionally sufficient for a simple account-scoped list operation: it names the resource, scope, and the required account_id is documented in the schema. However, with no output schema, it does not clarify the response shape or list limits, so it is adequate but not thorough.

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 single account_id parameter already has a clear description. The tool description merely repeats the account scope and adds no additional meaning about the parameter format, constraints, or behavior.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('Durable Object namespaces'), and adds the scoping phrase 'in an account'. This cleanly distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as list_kv_namespaces or list_d1_databases.

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 clearly scopes the operation to an account-level listing, which is useful context for selecting this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource is specific enough that usage is inferable.

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