Fl Api List

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

The description mentions 'empty = counts for all', giving a clue about the behavior of an empty parameter, but it does not disclose side effects, read-only nature, or return format. Since there are no annotations, the description carries the burden but provides insufficient detail.

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 concise sentence, with no superfluous words, making it highly efficient.

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?

The description is too brief for a tool with two undocumented parameters. It does not explain what a 'module' is, what 'functions' means in this context, or what the output schema is, relying on an external doc link.

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 schema has no descriptions for 'filter' and 'module', and the description barely addresses them. The phrase 'empty = counts for all' is ambiguous regarding which parameter it refers to, and 'filter' is not explained at all.

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 'List' and the resource 'functions of an FL scripting module', making the purpose evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools that also deal with modules or functions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool compared to others, such as fl_param_scan or fl_internal. It only describes the basic function without context.

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