list_symbols

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the fields returned and the filtering behavior but does not explain the 'library' parameter or what happens when it is empty. The read-only nature is implied by 'list' but not stated explicitly, and side effects are not addressed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage guidance. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy.

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 there is an output schema, return values are covered. The description provides the filtering options and usage context, but the unexplained 'library' parameter and lack of any mention of document scope or prerequisites leave a notable gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 description explains the 'category' parameter by listing all possible values and noting the empty default. However, the 'library' parameter is completely unexplained, and with 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for both parameters. It fails to do so for one of them.

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 that the tool offers symbol library information including block name, descriptions, category, and real size. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly directing users to 'Use this before insert_symbol when you do not know what exists.'

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?

Provides explicit usage instructions: filter by category with a specific set of values, or leave empty for all. Also states when to use this tool vs. insert_symbol, which is a clear alternative.

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