config_list_profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for safety disclosures. It clearly implies a read-only operation ('List'), but does not disclose expected output format, behavior when no profiles exist, or whether it reflects changes made by config_add_profile. This is a moderate gap for a simple listing tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope without verbosity.

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 (zero parameters, no output schema, and a clear scoping phrase 'in the current environment'), the description is mostly complete. It could mention what the returned list contains or how to interpret 'current environment', but these are minor omissions for a basic list operation.

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 accepts zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to explain. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but the baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and no compensation is needed.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('List'), resource ('profiles'), and scope ('current environment'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like config_switch_profile and crm_get_all_profiles by focusing on profile listing within the current environment.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks mentions of prerequisites, exclusions, or related tools such as config_get_status or config_list_environments. Usage context is only implied by the description.

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