list_patterns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns information (descriptions, typical steps, suggested operations) but does not explicitly state behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or performance characteristics. Since the tool has no parameters and no destructive effects are implied, the description is minimally adequate but could be more transparent.

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 extremely concise, with two short sentences that immediately convey the purpose and return value. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every sentence adds useful information. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, output schema present), the description satisfactorily covers what the tool does and what it returns. It mentions that the output includes descriptions, typical steps, and suggested operations, which is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's functionality.

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 description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description does not need to clarify parameter meanings. However, it adds value by describing the return content, which helps the agent understand what to expect. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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's purpose: 'List all available derivation patterns.' It specifies the resource ('derivation patterns') and the verb ('list'), and the return value ('Descriptions, typical steps, and suggested operations') further clarifies the function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'derive' (which performs derivations) and 'list_assumptions' (which lists assumptions) by focusing on derivation patterns.

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 usage for obtaining a list of patterns but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks statements about when not to use it or which other tools might be more appropriate for specific tasks. However, given the simplicity of a listing tool, the purpose itself offers adequate context for use.

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