List Extensions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose a read-only GET endpoint and the non-destructive 'List' action. It does not mention auth requirements, pagination, response shape, or side effects, but none are strongly expected for a simple list operation.

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 containing the key verb, resource, and endpoint. Every element earns its place and there is no fluff 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?

This is a simple zero-parameter list operation with no output schema. The description identifies the resource and endpoint clearly, which is largely sufficient. It does not specify the response format, but the simplicity of the operation keeps the description reasonably complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers all parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing for the description to add about parameters.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and a clear resource 'installed extensions', and includes the exact endpoint GET /sdapi/v1/extensions. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools that target other resources like extra networks, scripts, or checkpoints.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose: use this tool when you need to list installed extensions. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternative list tools, no exclusions, and no context about prerequisites.

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