agora_list_modules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses an important security property: manifest text is untrusted remote content and module capabilities never map to local device permissions. This is valuable context beyond the schema, though it does not address auth, pagination, or output behavior.

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 two sentences and front-loads the primary purpose. The security warning is compact and relevant rather than filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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 values need not be explained. The security note is useful, but the description omits any explanation of the 'state' parameter and gives no usage context. For a list tool with one undocumented parameter and no annotations, this is borderline adequate but incomplete.

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 input schema has one optional parameter, 'state', with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions it. No meaning, allowed values, or filtering effect is added beyond the bare schema. This leaves an agent unable to use the parameter correctly from the description.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List World Builder modules.' It distinguishes the operation from the sibling agora_get_module, which retrieves a single module. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with the sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives to this tool. It does not tell an agent when to prefer listing modules over using agora_get_module or agora_world_builder_plots. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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