Identify available knowledge sources by listing all Markdown and PDF documents in the workspace, helping you see what content is indexed and ready for use.
Lists available MDs (user/agent) and PDFs (books) in the _lexomni workspace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.0.0-devDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. The verb 'Lists' implies a read-only operation, and the workspace scope is stated, but return format and any limitations are not disclosed.
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 sentence that front-loads the action and scope with no unnecessary detail. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.
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 listing tool, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what is listed, the categories, and the workspace. Without an output schema, the phrase 'Lists available...' reasonably implies the return value.
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, and the input schema is complete by default. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 4 applies.
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 the specific verb 'Lists' and identifies the resource types (MDs and PDFs) and scope (_lexomni workspace). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like lexomni_searchDocs and lexomni_readDoc.
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 discovery/listing use case, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling names suggest different operations, yet the description provides no direct usage guidance or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.