List installed extensions

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint as false, so the safe read-only behavior is covered. The description adds useful detail about what is listed (version and enabled state) but does not disclose ordering, pagination, failure modes, or any other behavioral traits beyond the annotation-provided guarantees.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundancy. It states the action, the resource, and the relevant output fields in a compact form.

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, zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is complete. It identifies the target resource and the key fields returned, and since there is no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys what the caller should expect.

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 and the schema coverage is effectively complete, so there is no parameter information for the description to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not introduce any parameter-related ambiguity.

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 specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('backend extensions installed on the panel') and states the returned information ('version and enabled state'). This makes the tool's purpose immediately identifiable and distinct from the many sibling list tools.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any sibling tools. However, the zero-parameter read-only nature and the unique 'extensions' resource imply that it is for simple enumeration of installed backend extensions, so usage is clear enough but not explicitly guided.

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