List Schema Definitions

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context about returned fields (name, type, description, property count) and supports filtering/pagination, going beyond the annotation-only information.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action ('List all model/schema definitions') followed by the output summary and feature hints. No fluff or redundant information.

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 listing tool, the description is complete. It states what the tool returns (fields), mentions filtering and pagination, and the annotations confirm safety. No output schema exists, but the described output is sufficient for the intended use.

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?

All three parameters (limit, offset, keyword) are fully described in the schema, achieving 100% coverage. The description only restates that filtering and pagination are supported, which adds no new meaning beyond the existing schema descriptions.

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 lists all model/schema definitions in the API spec, with a specific verb ('List') and scope ('all model/schema definitions'). It also lists the expected output fields (name, type, description, property count), distinguishing it from sibling tools like `swagger_get_schema` which likely targets a single schema.

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 use cases: enumerating schemas, filtering by keyword, and paginating. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide direct alternatives (e.g., 'use get_schema for a specific schema'). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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