list_svg_cache

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing but says nothing about return shape, cache scope, pagination, or the relationship to the export/render siblings, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately terse for a zero-parameter list operation, though it is arguably too sparse to route the agent confidently.

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 no-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description should at least hint at what a cached SVG export entry represents and how the list relates to export_svg. As written it is minimally viable but leaves return-content questions open, especially since no output schema exists to compensate.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no syntax for the description to document. The baseline for a parameterless tool applies; the description simply cannot add parameter detail.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('cached SVG exports'), so the agent immediately knows what the tool returns. However, it does not distinguish this from siblings like get_cached_components or export_svg, which also touch cached SVG resources.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus export_svg, get_cached_components, or migrate_all_svgs. The agent is left to infer that this purely enumerates the cache without exporting or fetching individual components.

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