outliner.orphans

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

Despite no annotations, the word 'List' strongly implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, the description does not explicitly state behavioral traits (e.g., no side effects, idempotent), leaving a small gap for an AI agent.

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, concise sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 simple listing tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, terms like 'zero-user datablocks' and 'high-value Outliner categories' are not defined, potentially leaving an AI agent uncertain about the output scope.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to elaborate on parameters. It meets the baseline expectation for a parameterless tool, though it could hint at the return format given no output schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('zero-user datablocks') with context ('in high-value Outliner categories'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like outliner.orphans_purge.

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 implies a use case (listing orphans), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., before purging). The presence of outliner.orphans_purge as a sibling suggests a typical workflow, but it is not stated.

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