mmex_assets_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter options. It does not mention read-only nature, authentication, database connection requirements, or error handling (e.g., missing db_path).

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 very brief: one line for purpose, then a list of Args. It is front-loaded with the action and avoids unnecessary detail. Every sentence contributes value.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), return value documentation is not required. However, the description lacks context about error conditions, database access requirements, and potential performance implications. It is minimally adequate.

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 schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning to both parameters: db_path is the file path (optional with env var), db_key is for encryption (optional with env var). This clarifies their purpose and alternatives, exceeding what the schema provides.

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 'List all assets in the MMEX database,' specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mmex_assets_get (single asset) and mmex_assets_create. However, it does not elaborate on the returned data or scope beyond 'all assets.'

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., mmex_assets_get for filtering). There is no mention of prerequisites, compatibility, or cases where listing is not recommended.

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