gsd_list_phases

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral disclosure. 'List all phases' implies a read operation but does not state whether it is read-only, what fields are returned, ordering, filtering, or any side effects. Minimal behavior is conveyed beyond the action itself.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter tool without an output schema, the description is sparse. It does not explain what a 'phase' includes, the return format, whether the list is ordered, or any limits. Given the many sibling tools, more detail is needed for the agent to know what to expect.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is empty. Per rubric, a 0-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none to explain.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('phases from the roadmap'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like gsd_add_phase and gsd_insert_phase. The purpose is unmistakably to retrieve all phases.

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 viewing phases but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gsd_progress, gsd_state, or gsd_roadmap_analyze. There are no exclusions or alternative mentions, so it meets only the 'implied usage' level.

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