List available builds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so safety and side-effect behavior are covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by warning that 'use-case names are case- and space-sensitive and must match exactly,' which is important for downstream session creation. This goes beyond the annotations, though it doesn't describe output volume or pagination.

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 two concise sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives actionable usage guidance. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

This is a simple listing tool with one optional parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema. The description covers what it does, when to use it, and the critical exact-match caveat. All necessary context for invocation is present, making it complete for the agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already fully describes the one parameter 'domain' with a clear explanation and example. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'List every domain, version and use-case published by the ONDC config-service.' This unambiguously defines what the tool does and implicitly distinguishes it from sibling catalog tools like catalog_list_flows by focusing on 'builds' (domain/version/use-case) rather than flows.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this before session_create when the exact domain code, version or use-case name is uncertain.' It also explains the case/space sensitivity. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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