arcane_list_networks

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

The description is minimal and does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. With no annotations, it must carry the full burden, but it does not mention return format, pagination, ordering, or that this is a read-only operation. This is a significant gap for a list tool.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. It is efficient with no wasted words, which is appropriate for a simple list tool.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should explain more about the result set, such as whether it returns all networks or supports filtering beyond the search parameter. The description is too sparse to be fully actionable for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both environmentId and search. The description's phrase 'in an environment' merely restates the environmentId parameter and does not add new meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles parameter semantics.

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 resource (networks), and the scope (in an environment). It distinguishes itself from siblings like arcane_get_network (single network) and arcane_create_network/remove_network/prune_networks by focusing on listing.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it's obvious for listing, the description does not mention that arcane_get_network should be used for a single network or that pruning requires this list first. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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