List Dagster assets with their code version, last materialization, and partition count to inspect asset inventory and partition status.
Liste des assets Dagster avec leur code version, dernière matérialisation et nombre de partitions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page_size | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing and describes some returned fields, but it does not state read-only semantics, pagination behavior despite the page_size parameter, or any permission constraints.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The line break is cosmetic and does not hurt readability.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be exhaustively described. However, with no annotations and an undocumented page_size parameter, the description omits invocation details such as pagination behavior and read-only safety.
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 single optional parameter page_size has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention pagination or explain what page_size controls. It adds essentially no parameter meaning beyond the bare schema.
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 uses a clear verb ("Liste") and resource ("assets Dagster") and even names the returned fields (code version, last materialization, partition count). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as dagster_asset_state, but the resource is unambiguous.
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?
Listing assets is implied as the use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool versus dagster_asset_state or dagster_overview. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.