rhino_block_list

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, indicating a safe read operation. It adds that it returns object and instance counts, but does not disclose behaviors like error handling or behavior when doc_id is invalid. The annotations already cover the safety profile, so the description adds minimal extra context.

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 that delivers the essential information with no extraneous words. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and annotations indicating read-only, the description is fairly complete. It specifies the key output but could mention the default doc_id behavior or that it lists all blocks in the current document. Still, it covers the main purpose adequately.

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 0%, meaning the tool description does not explain any parameters. While the input schema itself describes the doc_id parameter (default 'active'), the description fails to add value beyond that. For a tool with low coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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 'List', the resource 'every block definition', and the output format 'per-definition object + instance count'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like rhino_block_insert or rhino_block_explode.

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 for listing block definitions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rhino_list_objects or rhino_layer_list. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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