list_libraries

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the output includes cache status but does not explicitly state read-only behavior or any side effects. The verb 'list' implies read-only, but more detail could be added.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and alternative usage is given succinctly. Conciseness is excellent.

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 0-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, output (libraries with cache status), and relationship to siblings. It is complete and sufficient for an AI agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds context about what the list contains (libraries with cache status), which is helpful beyond the empty 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 clearly states the tool lists libraries with cache status, using the verb 'list' and specifying the resource 'libraries'. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'get_docs' by directing to use that tool for content retrieval.

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 tells when to use this tool (to list libraries) and provides an alternative ('Use get_docs to retrieve content'). It is clear but does not explicitly mention when not to use or cover the 'refresh' sibling.

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