schema_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds important behavioral context: schemas are 'induced from sleep consolidation' and belong to Tier-0 and Tier-1. This supplements the annotations, though the safety profile is already well-covered.

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, front-loaded sentence broken into clear statements: action, scope, read-only, filters. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff. Highly efficient for an AI agent.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered. The description covers the action, data source, read-only nature, and available filters. It lacks mention of pagination or output format, but given the presence of an output schema, this is acceptable. Could be slightly more thorough but is adequate.

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%, with both 'domain' and 'confidence_min' already well-documented in the input schema (e.g., 'Only return schemas tagged with this domain'). The description mentions 'Filter by domain and confidence_min' but adds no new semantics beyond summarizing what the schema already conveys.

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?

Description clearly states 'List induced schemas (Tier-0 + Tier-1) from sleep consolidation', specifying a concrete verb and resource. The mention of read-only and filters further clarifies purpose, and the tool name 'schema_list' aligns well. No tautology, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like memory_recall by specifying schemas induced from sleep consolidation.

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 usage context (after sleep consolidation) but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like memory_recall_structural. No when-not-to-use guidance or alternative recommendations are provided. The read-only tag is present but not contrasted with mutation tools.

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