List Segments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only operation and that returned segments include permission data, but it does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, return format, or pagination behavior.

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 single sentence is front-loaded, has no filler, and states the action and resource immediately. It is arguably too terse for the information an agent needs, but the dimension itself rewards compact, front-loaded structure.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and two optional parameters including an 'instance_id override', the description is too sparse. It does not explain what segments are, how instance targeting works, what the returned permissions mean, or what an agent should expect from the call.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'timeout' and 'instance_id' fully. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 ('memory segments') and adds that permissions are included. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling listers like list_functions or list_globals, but the resource is specific enough to identify the tool without opening its schema.

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 provides no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not explain when to call list_segments versus add_segment, delete_segment, or any other listing tool, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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