List Foundry Worlds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat safety. It adds value by disclosing the return fields (online status, system, version info), which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't go into detail about pagination or error behavior, but given the simplicity of the tool, this is adequate.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and the key output data. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler or redundant content.

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 no parameters, the description fully conveys what is returned (worlds/clients, online status, system, version). The lack of output schema is compensated by the explanation of returned fields. The context of 'connected to the relay' clarifies the scope, making the tool complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to explain. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description properly avoids inventing any required arguments. It doesn't add parameter-level detail because none exist.

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 a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'Foundry VTT worlds/clients connected to the relay'. It distinctly differs from sibling tools like foundry_delete_entity or foundry_search, which handle entities and search operations. The scope is unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool: whenever you need an overview of all connected worlds/clients with their status. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the list operation is naturally distinct from the other CRUD/search tools. The context is clear enough without needing to name alternatives.

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