gaea_list_graphs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It states a read-only listing action, but does not mention whether the search recurses into subdirectories, what path format is returned, or what happens if the directory does not exist.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes to identifying the action, resource, and scope.

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?

For a simple one-parameter listing tool, the input is clear, but there is no output schema and the description does not specify return shape, recursion behavior, or edge cases. The description is minimally viable but leaves gaps.

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 input schema already fully describes the optional 'directory' parameter and its default behavior, so the description adds no additional param semantic value. Schema coverage is 100%, meeting the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), names the resource ('.terrain graph files'), and constrains the scope ('under GAEA_ROOT'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gaea_inspect_graph or gaea_open_graph.

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 implies use when you need to enumerate available .terrain graph files, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. Some context is present, but no direct routing guidance exists.

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