list_snippets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does disclose one meaningful trait: code content is deliberately omitted. However it says nothing about pagination, result limits, ordering, default behavior when no filters are supplied, or permissions.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the key behavioral fact (no code content) front-loaded and the return shape following. Every clause carries information, though the return-field list is slightly enumerative.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is exactly what an agent needs to know before choosing this over get_snippet. The remaining gap is pagination/limit behavior for an unfiltered list call, which is not addressed.

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 all four filters (tag, group, query, language) fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List code snippets from CodeMenu') plus a clear scope qualifier ('without full code content, to reduce token usage'). This implicitly distinguishes it from get_snippet, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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 'to reduce token usage' note hints that this is the lightweight browse path versus get_snippet for full code, but the when-to-use choice is never stated. No explicit conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are given.

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