planist_list_variables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'List' clearly implies a read operation, and the domain context (Project variable substrate and binding locations) adds useful scope, but the description omits details such as whether results are paginated, what metadata is returned, or any authorization requirements.

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 that conveys the action, target, and scope without redundancy. Every clause 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?

For a parameterless list operation, the description provides sufficient context about what is being listed and the domain scope. There is no output schema, but the description's 'List all...' strongly implies a list result; adding return shape would be a minor enhancement.

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 is empty and there are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is no parameter information needed, and the description does not introduce new parameter-like semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource: 'all reactive typed variables in the Project variable substrate'. It distinguishes this listing tool from sibling tools like planist_list_pages and planist_get_variable by specifying variable-bound contexts (Sheet cells, Dashboard KPIs, Docs, Workflows).

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 implies usage for enumerating all reactive typed variables, especially the 'List all' phrasing and scope mentions. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over planist_get_variable or planist_update_variable, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative guidance.

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