listItems

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool shows 'unlock methods and rarity distribution' which adds some behavioral context beyond basic listing, but doesn't address important aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, if there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or what format the output takes.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality. It's appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool and front-loads the main purpose. Every element (item types, unlock methods, rarity) earns its place in the description.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides adequate context about what information will be returned (item types, unlock methods, rarity distribution). However, it doesn't specify the scope (all items vs filtered), format, or structure of the output, which would be helpful given the lack of output schema.

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 description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and the schema already documents this completely.

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 tool's purpose: to catalog cosmetic items with specific examples (nameplates, MVP animations, emotes, sprays) and show unlock methods and rarity distribution. It uses a specific verb ('Catalog') and resource ('cosmetic items'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getItemsByType' or 'listSkins'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getItemsByType' or 'listSkins'. It mentions what the tool does but offers no context about when it's appropriate, what prerequisites might exist, or when other tools should be used instead.

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