list_bpmn_diagrams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds substantive context beyond that: what each mode returns (IDs/names/element counts, summary fields, diff additions/removals/changes). It doesn't cover pagination or limits for the list-all mode, but for a read-only inspection tool this is strong.

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?

Three sentences, one per mode, front-loaded with the no-arg behavior and progressively adding the optional parameters. No filler or redundancy; every clause conveys a distinct behavior.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, and the description still sketches each mode's payload. All three call patterns are covered, leaving nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds directional semantics the schema lacks: diagramId is the base and compareWith is the changed side of the diff, plus the mutual-dependency rule (compareWith only applies alongside diagramId). That is meaningful value beyond the schema text.

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 (List) plus a resource (BPMN diagrams) and enumerates three distinct modes keyed to parameters. An agent can distinguish this overview/list tool from list_bpmn_elements and list_bpmn_process_variables without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly maps each parameter combination to the mode it triggers (no args = list all, diagramId = summary, diagramId+compareWith = diff), giving clear when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives or stating when not to use this tool, so it is short of a 5.

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