list_flet_api

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations by clarifying that results reflect the local installed package's true flet.__all__ and that it is version-sensitive. This helps an agent trust the output as authoritative for the current environment.

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 focused sentences: the first delivers the core scope and grouping, the second gives an actionable use case. No filler or repetition of structured fields.

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 parameters, read-only annotations, and an output schema present, this description fully equips an agent to decide when to call the tool and what it will return. Nothing material is missing.

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 parameter semantics carry no burden. The description's category list helps set expectations for the output instead.

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 specifically names the resource ('every public name in the installed flet' / 'true flet.__all__') and the grouping behavior by category. This clearly distinguishes it from narrower sibling tools like list_flet_controls or search_flet_docs.

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 gives a concrete trigger: use this tool to discover what exists in the CURRENT version before guessing control or API names. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is clear.

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