List Blockbench settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that values returned are the 'current values' and that filter matches ids, which is useful, but says nothing about pagination/limit behavior, result ordering, or the read-only safety profile an agent would want confirmed.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a usage hint and one parameter note. No filler; each clause contributes something, though it is terse.

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?

For a simple two-parameter list tool with no annotations or output schema, the description gives purpose, a usage cue, and partial filter semantics. It still omits limit behavior and any hint about the returned shape beyond 'current values', leaving gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that filter matches the id (adding real meaning), but the limit parameter is left completely undocumented in both the description and the schema.

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 (List) and resource (user settings with their current values), which distinguishes it from the many other bb_list_* siblings and from bb_set_setting. The phrase 'by id' is slightly confusing since neither declared parameter is an id, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

'Handy before bb_set_setting' gives a concrete usage context and points at the complementary write tool. It lacks any when-not guidance or explanation of how to use limit, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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