List all state guides

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does state the tool 'returns' data and lists the returned fields, which implies a read-only listing operation. However, it does not disclose possible response size, pagination, ordering, or access constraints, though these are less critical for a simple no-parameter list tool.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action and return fields front-loaded. The purpose statement adds value without unnecessary detail, making the description both concise and structured well.

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 no-argument listing tool, the description explains what is returned and why to call it, which is sufficient for basic selection. It could briefly describe the output structure or clarify the difference from list_supported_states, but those gaps are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 the input schema clearly documents that, so there is no parameter detail the description needs to add. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not conflict with the schema.

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 returns every available state guide and names the exact fields returned (code, title, slug). It differentiates itself from get_state_lien_guide by framing itself as the pre-fetch discovery step, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling list_supported_states.

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 says it is useful for discovering what exists before fetching one, which guides the agent to use this before get_state_lien_guide. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or how it compares to list_supported_states, but the discovery context is clear.

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