list_shows

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'List' implies a non-mutating read, and the description usefully discloses what is returned, but it says nothing about side effects, permissions, or how 'active' is determined. Adequate but with clear gaps for a zero-annotation tool.

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 short sentences with zero waste: the first states the action, the second front-loads the return shape. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description compensates by describing exactly what the call yields (available show folders and the active one). For a parameterless read tool, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 takes zero parameters and the schema is an empty object, so there is nothing to disambiguate. The baseline for a parameterless tool applies, with no parameter-level confusion possible.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List all configured xLights show folders') and even characterizes the return payload (folder names plus which is active). It does not explicitly name a sibling such as switch_show, so there is no direct sibling differentiation, but the read-only inspection scope is 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?

Usage is implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before switch_show, since the result reveals the active show. However, no explicit when-to-use statement or named alternative (e.g., 'use switch_show to change the active show') is provided.

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