List widgets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the return shape, case-insensitive filtering behavior, and the important caveat that atomic types may reject classic settings, which is meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return shape, then filter usage, then integration guidance and caveat. Every sentence adds useful information with no wasted wording.

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 one-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape, filtering behavior, how to use the result in a create operation, and a caveat about atomic widget compatibility. Nothing material is 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already documents the filter as a case-insensitive substring of type or title. The description reinforces this with concrete search examples like "button" or "image", adding a little practical meaning beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: lists widget types registered in this Elementor installation, and even gives the return shape [{type, title, categories, atomic}]. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_widget_controls or get_canvas_skeleton.

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?

Explains how to use the filter with concrete examples, how to consume the returned type as widgetType in a create op with elType "widget", and warns that atomic types prefixed "e-" are V4 and may reject classic settings. It does not name alternative sibling tools, but the usage context is clear.

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