list_meta_sound_references

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds behavior beyond those hints: the source is loaded to resolve its package, and hard or soft references are included. It does not discuss performance or failure modes, but adds meaningful context.

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?

Three tight clauses: purpose plus alternative, read-only/loading note, and return shape. The scoping constraint is front-loaded, and every sentence carries distinct information.

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?

With one required parameter, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description supplies the return shape and the loading caveat. No material gaps remain for correct invocation.

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% and the single parameter includes an example and the note that MetaSound Patches are not accepted. The tool description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is 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 specific verb 'List' and resource 'packages that reference a MetaSound Source asset', plus scope 'hard or soft, from the Asset Registry, with their count'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling get_asset_referencers, which handles assets of any type.

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?

Directly routes agents to get_asset_referencers for assets of any type, mirroring the high-calibration example's explicit alternative. The intended use is clear from the scoped purpose and the named alternative.

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