ue_landscape_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists current-level landscapes, defines what an empty list means, and reveals a key limitation: Python cannot create landscapes. It does not describe the exact return format, but that is a minor gap for a simple listing tool.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds a crucial empty-list caveat and a workaround. Every sentence 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?

For a parameterless list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete: it states what is listed, how to interpret the result, implications for sibling tools, and how to proceed if no landscapes exist. An agent can confidently select and invoke this 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, so there is nothing to explain. The description's reference to 'livello corrente' effectively defines the implicit scope, and no parameter details are needed.

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 identifies the resource ('landscape presenti nel livello corrente') and clearly implies a list operation, reinforced by 'Se la lista è vuota'. However, the first sentence is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb phrase like 'Elenca i landscape', so it is slightly less direct.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: check if landscapes exist before using other landscape tools, because 'nessun altro tool di questa famiglia ha su cosa lavorare'. It also gives the alternative action (add landscapes from the editor in Landscape Mode) and explains that Python cannot create them.

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