bambuddy_list_print_sources

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

Annotations already signal read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful domain behavior beyond that: results are recent, archived .gcode.3mf sources, and filesystem paths and archive internals are excluded. This helps set expectations about the shape of returned data.

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 short sentences convey purpose, resource type, usage context, and an important exclusion. Every sentence earns its place, and the key action is front-loaded.

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?

The output schema and annotations reduce the burden of explaining return values and safety. However, the description leaves parameter semantics completely unaddressed and only implies when to use the tool. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain limit, offset, or printer_id. The description adds no meaning beyond the raw parameter names, so an agent has to guess how these affect listing behavior. With low schema coverage, the description was responsible for compensating and did not.

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') and a well-defined resource ('recent archived .gcode.3mf print sources') tied to a clear use case ('selected for a Bambuddy queue job'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_printers by describing a different kind of entity, and explicitly excludes filesystem paths and archive internals, further narrowing scope.

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 phrase 'can be selected for a Bambuddy queue job' gives clear context for when this tool should be used: when an agent needs an eligible print source to enqueue a job. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the purpose is clear enough to guide selection.

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