serial_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses an external dependency ('pyserial') and the cross-platform behavior. It does not mention error handling or return format, but the operation is simple and the description is honest.

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, no filler. Every sentence adds value: the first states the purpose with cross-platform detail, the second states the dependency. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

While the description covers the purpose and dependency, it lacks information about the return value format (e.g., list of strings, device paths). With no output schema, the description could have explained what the agent will receive. Otherwise, adequate for a simple tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description need not add parameter information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'available serial ports' clearly state the tool's action and target. The cross-platform naming examples (COMx, /dev/tty*) add specificity. It distinguishes from sibling 'serial_capture', which implies a different operation.

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 prerequisites ('Requires pyserial') and contextual cross-platform details, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'serial_capture'. However, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer that it is for enumeration before capture.

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