List Blocks

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses a key behavioral trait: the result is never truncated and the compact envelope always reports truncated=false. This is valuable runtime context that is not available from annotations or the schema alone.

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 tightly written sentences. The first delivers the core purpose and expected fields; the second adds the most important behavioral caveat. No filler or repetition.

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 read-only annotation, rich parameter schema with descriptions, and an output schema, the description covers the remaining essential context: output scope, non-truncation, and the compact envelope behavior. Nothing critical 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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning by explaining what fields exist in the block definitions and by connecting the compact envelope to the never-truncated guarantee. This goes beyond simply repeating schema names.

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 a specific action ('List'), a precise resource ('all block definitions in the drawing'), and the returned fields ('name, origin, attribute count, entity count'). It clearly distinguishes this from filtered or reference-based block 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 makes clear this returns the whole block table and never truncates, which sharpens when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose and scope are unambiguous enough for a selection decision.

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