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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It says 'list', implying a read-only operation without side effects. However, it does not specify what the returned list contains (e.g., IDs, names, URLs), which is a transparency gap for the agent.

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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. It directly states the resource ('walkable demo scenes'), the action ('list'), and a pointer to a related tool, all efficiently.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify what the list output looks like. It doesn't mention whether it returns names, IDs, or other details. The pointer to get_demo adds some context, but the lack of output specification makes it incomplete for an agent to fully anticipate the result.

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 no parameters in the schema, and per the rubric, 0 parameters earns a baseline score of 4. The description correctly makes no mention of parameters, aligning with the 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?

The description clearly states the action: 'list the walkable demo scenes'. It explicitly distinguishes this tool from get_demo by noting that get_demo is for placements, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides usage guidance by stating 'Use get_demo for the placements', which tells the agent when to use this tool versus the sibling. However, it could more explicitly state when to use this tool itself, such as 'when you need an overview of available demos'.

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