Lists available admin actions for the Author model in Django admin. Returns each action's name and description so you can execute it.
List available admin actions for Author. Returns action names and descriptions that can be executed via action_author.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does disclose the shape of the result ('action names and descriptions') even though no output schema exists. It is silent on permissions or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter read-only listing the remaining behavioral surface is small.
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?
Two tight sentences with zero filler; the purpose is front-loaded and the cross-reference to action_author immediately follows. Nothing could be trimmed without losing routing information.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description must cover returns and routing, and it does both in brief. It is complete enough to call correctly, though a note on when the action list changes or requires admin privileges would close the last gap.
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 takes no parameters (empty schema, 100% coverage), so per the baseline this scores 4. The description correctly adds no parameter detail because there is none to add.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List available admin actions for Author') and immediately distinguishes itself from the executor sibling by noting the results are 'executed via action_author.' An agent can tell this is the discovery tool and action_author is the execution tool without opening either schema.
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 pairing with action_author gives clear implied context: call this first to learn which actions exist, then invoke one via action_author. There is no explicit when-not or prerequisite guidance (e.g., caching, permissions), but the discovery-vs-execution routing is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.