list_capi_functions

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

Description states it is a search operation returning specific data, implying read-only behavior. No annotations exist, but description accurately portrays a safe, non-destructive tool with no hidden effects.

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 sentences deliver all necessary information: what the tool does and when to use it. No filler or redundancy; front-loaded with core purpose.

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?

Covers tool's domain (C-API from ABI snapshot) and return structure (name, return type, parameter types) well. Lacks details on output format or pagination, but given tool simplicity, it's adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with both 'filter' and 'limit' described in the schema. Description adds no new semantic information beyond the schema; it repeats 'substring filter' but does not enhance understanding.

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?

Description clearly states it searches the FLOX C-API surface for exported flox_* functions, returning name, return type, and parameter types. No other sibling tool covers C API listings, so it's well-differentiated.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: writing FFI code (Codon, QuickJS, Rust cgo, ctypes) or when a user asks 'what C symbols can I call'. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but context is clear.

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