list_procedures

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the tool is read-only, whether it returns a list or other structure, or any limitations (e.g., pagination, access restrictions). The minimal description fails to disclose important behavioral traits.

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 sentence, which is concise and to the point. It is not verbose, but could be slightly improved by adding more structural information (e.g., that it returns a list) without being wordy.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the return format or any context about what constitutes 'available procedures'. An agent might benefit from knowing it returns a list of procedure objects with IDs or names.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The schema coverage is 100% (empty). Baseline is 4 since the description is not required to add value beyond the schema for parameters, but it does not provide any additional parameter context.

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 available procedures, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It easily distinguishes from sibling tools like create_procedure, delete_procedure, get_procedure_info, run_procedure, and update_procedure.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it does not mention that get_procedure_info is for a single procedure or that list_procedures is for getting an overview. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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