arrangement_list

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must bear the transparency burden. It declares a read-only listing operation, which is clear. However, it does not disclose details like ordering, whether it returns names or indices, or any formatting specifics. For a simple list tool, this is minimally acceptable.

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, concise sentence that contains no filler. Every word is useful.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It fails only to specify the return format (e.g., list of names or IDs), but for a straightforward enumeration, this is a minor gap.

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 the schema provides full coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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 explicitly states 'List all arrangements', which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like arrangement_current (which returns the current arrangement) or arrangement_select (which selects an arrangement).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites. The description lacks context about typical usage scenarios before performing operations on arrangements.

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