list_cached_selectors

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait (costs nothing) and is clearly read-only via 'Show,' but it doesn't explain what happens when no selectors exist or if authentication is needed. Adequate but not rich.

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 one short sentence with an added cost hint, both earning their place. It's front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple list tool with an output schema and a single parameter, the description covers the core purpose and cost behavior. It doesn't need to detail return values due to the output schema. Minor gap: no mention of empty results or preconditions, but acceptable for simplicity.

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 has zero description coverage for the 'domain' parameter. The description only repeats 'domain' without providing format, examples, or constraints, so it adds little meaning beyond the parameter name.

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 the tool shows CSS selectors already learned for a domain, using a specific verb ('Show') and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like scrape and refresh_selectors by focusing on cached selector lookup.

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 notes that the operation 'costs nothing,' implying it's a low-cost read operation. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, this context suggests it can be used to check cache before more expensive operations. Could be more explicit, hence 4.

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