supabase_storage_list_buckets

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and determinism. The description adds the 'all' scope—indicating no filtering or pagination—beyond the annotations, which is a useful behavioral trait.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys exactly the necessary information with zero waste. It is concise without sacrificing clarity.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, but the description does not indicate what the response will look like (e.g., fields returned for each bucket). For a listing operation, this leaves some ambiguity about return values, so it is not fully complete.

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 schema coverage is 100% (empty object). With no parameters to explain, the description doesn't need to add parameter detail, and the baseline of 4 applies.

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 'List all storage buckets' uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('storage buckets'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like create_bucket or list_files. It fully and unambiguously states the tool's purpose.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: whenever you need to see all storage buckets. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the scope is evident and there are no competing list-bucket tools among the siblings, so exclusionary guidance is unnecessary.

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