list_revit_views

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

Without annotations, the description does not reveal behavioral details such as what 'exportable' means (e.g., views that are not templates or locked), performance implications, or side effects. However, for a simple listing operation with no parameters, the disclosure is minimally adequate.

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 that directly conveys the tool's purpose with no redundant or extraneous words. It is optimally concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

While adequate for a no-parameter tool, the description does not specify the format of the returned list (e.g., array of view names or IDs) or any constraints on the model state. Given the absence of an output schema, more detail would improve completeness.

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?

With zero parameters (100% schema coverage), the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying that the list is of 'exportable views', which clarifies what is being returned 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'list of all exportable views' within the scope 'in the current Revit model'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_current_view_elements' and 'create_view', making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this tool lists views suitable for export before using export tools, nor does it specify conditions like needing an active model or that views must be exportable.

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