list_reliance

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It explains return format and introduces the 'blast radius' concept, adding context about consequences. Could mention if it's read-only or error handling for invalid model_id.

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?

Two sentences plus a code block, immediately stating purpose and output structure. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 complexity (bidirectional edges) and presence of output schema in description, the description is mostly complete. Missing details about error scenarios or prerequisites like existence of model_id.

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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (model_id documented, server_version not). Description adds no extra meaning for parameters beyond schema. Does not compensate for the undocumented server_version.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'list' and specific resource 'cross-model dependency edges' as both consumer and provider. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_reliance or delete_reliance by being the only list operation for these edges.

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?

Explains what the output means (consumer vs provider, blast radius) but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternative tools like get_system_dependencies. Implicitly, it's for inspecting reliances, but lacks exclusions.

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