p4_stream_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and says nothing about return format, error behavior, wildcard semantics, or whether a Perforce connection is needed. This is a significant transparency gap for a listing tool.

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 sentence with zero wasted words. It is concise, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant 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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the result looks like (e.g., list of stream names or paths) and how the parameters combine. It does neither. The 100% schema coverage helps but does not compensate for the missing return-value context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter (path, depot, filter) already explained. The description adds minimal value beyond aligning with the 'filter' parameter, but it does not clarify parameter interactions or provide examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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's action: 'List all streams or streams matching a pattern.' The verb 'list' and resource 'streams' define the primary purpose, and the mention of pattern matching adds scope. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like p4_stream_info or p4_stream_switch, which is a slight gap.

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 implies the tool is for listing streams (both all and filtered by pattern), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as p4_stream_info. There are no stated exclusions or prerequisites, so the usage context is only implicitly understood.

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