list_namespaces

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses error conditions (DllNotFoundError), return format (NamespaceListResult with sorted namespaces and total count), and the dll parameter requirement (absolute path, readable file). This is comprehensive and beyond minimal.

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 well-structured with example and parameter docs, but it is somewhat verbose with the docstring format including Args/Returns/Raises. Could be slightly tighter without losing clarity, but earns high marks for organization.

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 has an output schema so return values are covered by that; the description adds error handling and parameter constraints. Given the tool's moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete and leaves no gaps for an AI agent to misinterpret.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds full meaning: dll is 'Absolute path to the assembly to inspect' and asm_paths is 'Extra dependency dirs (almost never needed — see decompile_type)'. This compensates entirely for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 tool lists distinct namespaces with type counts, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning it as the first step for exploring unknown DLLs, unlike list_types, decompile_type, etc.

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?

Explicitly advises use as a first step for exploring unknown game/mod DLLs and provides an example. It also notes when asm_paths is rarely needed and directs to decompile_type for context, giving clear guidance on when to use and alternatives.

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