reunion_list_museums

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

Describes the return fields and context of the designation (scientific standards, public access, inalienability). No annotations exist, but the description sufficiently conveys read-only behavior. Lacks explicit mention of completeness or pagination, but these are inferred for a parameterless list.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundancy. Every sentence serves a purpose: statement of function, context of designation, return fields and sibling guidance.

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?

Given no output schema and no parameters, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use related tools. Context about the designation adds meaningful depth.

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?

No parameters in schema; description adds no param info (not needed). Schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Baseline 4 is appropriate as description adds value through return field listing.

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?

Clearly specifies the verb 'list' and resource 'museums with Musée de France designation'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like reunion_get_museum_attendance and reunion_search_joconde_collections by explicitly referencing them.

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 guidance: use this tool for museum listing, and use reunion_get_museum_attendance for attendance data or reunion_search_joconde_collections for artwork records.

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