seafile_list_libraries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it's a read operation (implied by 'List'), requires account-based authentication, has limitations with repository token authentication, and describes the return format. It doesn't mention rate limits or pagination, but covers the essential safety and operational context.

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 perfectly structured and concise: first sentence states the purpose, second explains returns and scope, third covers authentication constraints, and fourth clarifies return format. Every sentence adds value with zero redundancy or fluff.

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 tool's simplicity (0 parameters, read-only operation), the description is complete: it explains what it does, authentication requirements, limitations, and return values. The existence of an output schema means the description doesn't need to detail Library object structure, and it covers all necessary context for this straightforward listing tool.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so the schema already fully documents the empty input. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter details, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and behavior. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 specific action ('List all accessible Seafile libraries') and resource ('libraries/repositories'), distinguishing it from siblings like seafile_get_library_info (single library) and seafile_list_directory (directory contents). The verb 'List' is precise and the scope 'all accessible' is well-defined.

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 clear context about when to use it ('list all libraries the authenticated user has access to') and mentions authentication requirements, but doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like seafile_get_library_info or seafile_list_directory. It tells you what it does but not when to choose it over similar tools.

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