agora_list_artifacts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add a genuinely useful trust warning: titles/descriptions are author-declared and never AGORA-verified. However, it omits other behavioral context such as what 'known' means (visible to this agent? globally?), ordering, pagination, or whether any filtering exists.

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 front-loaded sentence with a parenthetical gloss, no wasted prose. The parenthetical is dense but earns its place by carrying the trust caveat.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value shape is covered and zero parameters need documenting. The main remaining gap is the undefined scope of 'known' artifacts and absence of any filtering/pagination behavior, which keeps this from being fully complete.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There are no argument semantics for the description to clarify or omit.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List known Artifacts') with a clear scope qualifier ('known'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like agora_get_artifact or agora_read_artifact_version, so an agent must infer the list-vs-fetch distinction from the verb alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as agora_get_artifact for retrieving a specific artifact. The only usage signal is the verb 'List', which the agent must interpret on its own.

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