List Scripts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of safety disclosure. It indicates a GET request, which implies read-only behavior, and 'list' is non-mutating. However, it does not disclose return structure, argument detail, or potential side effects such as lazy loading.

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 containing the action, resource, endpoint, and a practical usage hint. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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 simple zero-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential details: what it lists, the HTTP endpoint, and how to use the result. It could mention the format of 'arguments', but this is not critical for selecting or invoking the tool.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining that the returned 'name' field should be used as script_name in downstream calls, which is meaningful beyond the empty schema.

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 action ('List') and resource ('available scripts') and even includes the endpoint, making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate this from the sibling tool sdnext_script_info, which likely serves a related purpose.

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 phrase 'Use name for script_name' gives a downstream usage hint, implying the output should be consumed by a tool accepting script_name. But it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sdnext_script_info or other listing tools.

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