list_seeders

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool is 'Read-only', which indicates no side effects, but does not explain what 'discovered' means (e.g., file system scan vs. registered entries) or the response format. Adequate for a simple list, but lacks depth.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with zero wasted words. The action and read-only nature are stated first, making it efficient for an agent 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 parameterless read-only listing, the description is nearly complete. However, it does not specify whether the output includes file paths, names, or timestamps, and 'discovered' is ambiguous. With no output schema, additional details would help, but the tool's simplicity makes this acceptable.

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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description needs no parameter details. The 'List discovered seeder files' text adds no param info, but the baseline of 4 applies since there are no parameters to document.

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 resource ('seeder files'), with the 'Read-only' qualifier clarifying the operation type. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like make_seeder (creation) and run_seed (execution).

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., run_seed, make_seeder). The description implies a listing use case, but an agent would benefit from stating when to prefer listing over executing or creating seeds.

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