list_prompts

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

No annotations provided, but the description declares it as 'Read-only' and describes the output contents (names, descriptions, arguments, count). This sufficiently conveys the tool's safe, non-destructive nature and return format.

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 concise sentences front-loading the purpose and usage, with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, usage, and output adequately. Could mention that it only lists metadata, not actual prompt content, but that's implied.

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, the description adds value by explaining the output. It states what data the tool returns, which is helpful beyond the empty 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 clearly states it lists MCP prompts bundled with the server, specifying it returns prompt names, descriptions, arguments, and total count. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being focused on prompts rather than audio/MIDI operations.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when the user asks what workflows are available') and for which clients (those not exposing prompt discovery natively). Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but context is clear.

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