lightprobe-list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not state what is returned (e.g., names, full object data, counts) or any side effects. It adds minimal value beyond the tool name.

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 extremely concise at four words, with no filler. It front-loads the action and object. While it could add a bit more detail, it avoids any verbosity and is appropriately sized for a trivial zero-param list operation.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves gaps. It does not clarify what distinguishes 'list' from 'report', nor what shape the returned list takes. Given the simplicity, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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 has zero parameters, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description adequately reflects that there are no inputs to configure.

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 'List light probe objects' uses a specific verb 'List' and a clear resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like lightprobe-create, lightprobe-report, and lightprobe-set. It is slightly less distinct from lightprobe-report, which may also enumerate information, but the intent is clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as lightprobe-report or lightprobe-set. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are given, leaving the agent to guess which listing tool is appropriate.

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