list_tools

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

Without annotations, description partially discloses behavior by mentioning return structure but omits side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. Acceptable for a read-like 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?

Two sentences, direct and front-loaded. Every word adds value; no fluff.

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 2 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose and output adequately. Lacks details on pagination or format but still useful.

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?

Schema coverage is 50% (provider_id described, tool_type has enum but no description). Description adds no extra context beyond the schema, thus baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states it lists tools from a provider with full schemas, distinguishing it from siblings like list_apps or list_datasets that likely return simpler lists. Specifies return content (names, parameters with form type, required, defaults).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., list_tool_providers, list_node_types). Agent is left to infer from the name and context.

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