List stories

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 does imply a complete, unfiltered read ('every story') and that ids are returned, but it says nothing about result shape, ordering, or size limits for a potentially large catalog. Adequate but thin for an unannotated tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence stating purpose followed by the reason to call it. Every clause earns its place with no restatement of the tool name or title.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of return-value information, and it only gestures at it ('find a story id'). An agent does not learn whether the response is a bare id list or full story metadata, nor whether it could be large. Enough to call correctly, not enough to consume the result confidently.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool applies. The description correctly does not invent or imply any inputs.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List every story in the running Storybook') and explicitly names the sibling it feeds into ('open_story'). An agent can distinguish this from click, dispatch_event, or get_events without inspecting any 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?

It states the use case clearly ('so you can find a story id for open_story without guessing'), which is exactly the routing condition an agent needs against the sibling set. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming alternative discovery paths, so it falls just below a 5.

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