bowire.allowlist.show

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the return content: the allowed URLs and the toggles/seed sources (environments seed, typed-URLs seed, --allow-arbitrary-urls) that produced them. The 'show' framing makes the read-only nature clear; there's little destructive risk to disclose for a no-param diagnostic.

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 sentence, front-loaded with 'Diagnostic' so the agent immediately knows the tool's role. The parenthetical list of feeding toggles is dense but relevant, not padding.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must cover return values, and it does name both the URL list and the seed toggles. For a simple no-param diagnostic this is essentially complete, with only the missing sibling contrast and prerequisites as 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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description's incidental mention of config toggles is not a parameter, so it neither helps nor hurts.

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?

States a concrete verb ('show') and resource ('URLs the agent is currently allowed to call'), and ties it to the invoke/subscribe flow plus the config toggles that produced the list. It clearly reads as a read-only inspection tool, though it never names the mutating sibling bowire.allowlist.permit to sharpen the distinction.

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?

Labeling it 'Diagnostic' implies the when-to-use context (to inspect current allowlist state), but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over siblings like allowlist.permit, nor any prerequisite or exclusion guidance. Usage is implied rather than specified.

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