List Marvin resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool supports pagination filters (limit, offset) and resourceType filtering, which are behavioral traits. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, idempotent, or has rate limits. It also lacks details about error behavior or authentication requirements.

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 extremely concise at 10 words in a single sentence. Every word is functional, and the core action ('List reusable Marvin resources') is front-loaded. No wasted overhead or redundancy.

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 3 parameters and zero output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, pagination behavior (e.g., how to request next page, or if total count is returned), or what constitutes a 'resource'. The sibling tools suggest a family of list operations, but this tool's specific output structure is unspecified.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meaning. The single sentence mentions 'pagination filters' but does not explain what each parameter (limit, offset, resourceType) does, their valid values, or defaults. The schema provides structural constraints (e.g., limit max 100) but no semantic meaning. The agent is left guessing how to use the parameters correctly.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'Marvin resources'. It specifies the filtering mechanism 'resourceType pagination filters', distinguishing it from sibling list tools like marvin_list_assets or marvin_list_collections. The mention of 'SDK-supported' adds context about backend integration.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisite conditions, when not to use, or what differentiates it from other list tools. For example, it does not clarify whether marvin_list_resources is the only way to list resources or if siblings offer more specific filtering.

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