list_resources

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

Declares 'Read-only', which is a critical behavioral trait. No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. Could mention no side effects, but sufficient for a list operation.

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?

Single sentence covering purpose, usage context, and return values. No wasted 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?

With no output schema, description adequately explains what the tool returns (URI, name, description, MIME type, total count). Complete for a simple list tool.

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?

No parameters in input schema, so description needs to add no parameter info. Schema coverage is 100%, baseline is high, and description adds value by listing return fields.

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?

Clearly states it lists MCP resources, with specific verb ('list') and resource type ('MCP resources'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_prompts and list_recipes.

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 says 'Use when the user asks what context URIs are available'. Does not mention when not to use, but sibling tools cover other resource types, so context is implied.

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