dashai_list_components

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context beyond those: the catalogue is plugin-dependent, names cannot be guessed, and an unfiltered call returns a long result. It also documents the return JSON structure, including the 'schema' field, which is not present in the annotations.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a high-value usage note, and compact Args/Returns sections. It is not overly long and every sentence carries useful information, though the Args section partly repeats schema content.

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, the description covers purpose, when to use it, the parameter, the return format, and a critical behavioral caveat (plugin-dependent catalogue). It is complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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 only parameter, 'params', is described in an Args section, and the 'types' filter's valid values are listed. While the input schema's description for 'types' already provides the same valid values and the long-output caveat, the tool description nonetheless clarifies the structure of the 'params' wrapper and the meaning of the returned 'schema' field, adding value beyond the raw 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 opens with 'Lists the registered components: models, metrics, tasks and optimizers', using a specific verb and enumerating the resource types. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like dashai_list_datasets and dashai_describe_dataset.

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?

It explicitly states 'ALWAYS use this before dashai_train_model' and explains that names are exact/case-sensitive and the catalogue changes with installed plugins. This provides strong when-to-use guidance and a rationale for why the tool must be called first, which is more than typical.

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