get_parts_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly states a read-only 'Get' operation, implying no unintended side effects. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is adequate, though it could have mentioned any sorting, filtering, or return format specifics.

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 a single sentence, directly front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler words or unnecessary details.

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 minimal complexity (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains what the tool does and what it returns. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description does not need to compensate for any undocumented fields.

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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('list of parts'), and the specific scope ('parts library addon'), making its purpose unambiguous. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_objects and insert_part_from_library, which address different resources or actions.

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 usage context is implied: call this tool to retrieve the list of parts from the parts library. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over get_objects or insert_part_from_library, nor any exclusion criteria, so it only partially addresses alternatives.

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