list_blocks

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully discloses behavior: it states 'Read-only, no side effects' and details the returned fields (state, sensor, value, length, curvature, speed, comment), giving the agent full transparency.

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 well-structured and informative but slightly verbose. It could be trimmed slightly, but every sentence adds context. It front-loads the primary function and then explains details.

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 fully explains what the tool returns, including the semantics of blocks and their attributes. It also covers use cases and contrasts with sensors, making it complete for its complexity.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description does not need to add parameter info. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the tool has no parameters.

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 it lists every layout block with occupancy state, and explicitly distinguishes from get_block. The verb 'list' and resource 'blocks' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use this to discover what blocks exist before calling get_block' and answers specific questions like 'what blocks are there?' and 'is anything occupied right now?', contrasting with sensor-level queries.

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