list_speed_tests

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says 'List speed tests' and provides no information about pagination, ordering, result shape, rate limits, or what kind of zones/URLs are valid. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 with the action verb front-loaded and no unnecessary words. It lacks structured detail, but for a simple two-parameter list operation, this level of brevity is acceptable.

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?

This is a simple list tool with two well-documented required parameters, so the bare description is minimally viable. However, with no output schema and no annotation context, the lack of any indication about result format, pagination, or related concepts like scheduled tests leaves the description somewhat incomplete.

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%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description adds only the 'zone URL' framing, which is marginal and does not enrich the parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear action ('List') and resource ('speed tests') scoped to a zone URL. It is understandable on its own, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby get_speed_test or list_speed_available_regions tools beyond the plural verb, and 'zone URL' is slightly imprecise.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to choose this tool over get_speed_test, get_speed_schedule, or list_speed_available_regions, nor does it mention any context such as scheduling or available regions.

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