List Preferences

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the scope 'all saved preferences' and the optional category filter, but it does not disclose behavior such as pagination, ordering, or return format. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the optional qualifier. Every part is necessary.

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 simple, read-only list tool with one optional parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to understand when to call it and what it does. No critical call-time information appears to be missing.

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 input schema already covers the only parameter, category, with 'Filter by category,' and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning about format, allowed values, or behavior of the category parameter.

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?

Description states a specific operation ('List') and resource ('saved preferences'), and notes the optional category filter. This is enough to distinguish it from siblings like memory_pref_get, memory_pref_save, and memory_list.

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 clearly conveys that the tool lists preferences and may filter by category, but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as memory_pref_get for a single preference or memory_list for non-preference memory entries. Usage is mostly implied rather than stated.

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