List sprites

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state the return contents (position, size, media) and implies a read-only listing, which is reasonable. However, it doesn't mention ordering, performance, or any side-effects, though for a simple list these may be assumed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys purpose and return contents efficiently.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states what is returned (position, size, media). For a simple no-argument list tool this is essentially complete, though it doesn't describe the exact return data structure.

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 zero parameters, so there is no schema coverage gap to compensate and no parameter semantics to document. The baseline 4 applies since nothing needs explanation.

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 clear verb 'List' and resource 'sprites' with the returned fields (position, size, media). The phrase 'every sprite' implies a full list, distinguishing it from single-target get_target, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling difference.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus get_target or list_blocks, no exclusions, and no context about the project being open or load state. Usage is left entirely to inference.

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