treeflow_list_fertilizers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Lista' clearly indicates a non-mutating enumeration, but the description does not disclose output format, pagination, behavior on invalid tree_id, or any prerequisites. For a simple list operation this is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the resource categories. Every phrase contributes meaning and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 low complexity—one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations—the description provides enough to understand the tool's purpose and scope. It could clarify what the returned list looks like or define 'fertilizantes' further, but the parenthetical and the verb 'Lista' make the core behavior understandable.

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 100% description coverage for tree_id ('ID del bot/árbol'). The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, examples, or constraints, so it meets the baseline but does not go beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Lista') and a specific resource category: additional tools/fertilizers, custom scripts, and Knowledge Base (RAG) configurations for a bot. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as treeflow_list_branches or treeflow_list_tegrations, though the 'fertilizantes' metaphor is slightly ambiguous without extra context.

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 context of the tool is clear: use it to enumerate a bot's additional tools/scripts/RAG settings. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no exclusions, so the agent must infer the appropriate situation from the description and sibling names.

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