List Available Archicad Commands

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the tool returns a comprehensive list with brief descriptions and clarifies it does not provide exact arguments, directing to the schema tool. It does not mention any connection requirements or output size, but is generally transparent for a simple listing tool.

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?

Three concise sentences lead with the primary behavior, then deliver stepwise instructions without redundancy. The STEP 1/STEP 2 formatting makes the flow easy to follow and every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage flow, and relation to sibling tools. It leaves no obvious gaps for correct invocation.

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 has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description adds contextual workflow guidance about how to use the returned command names, which is relevant even without parameter details.

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 the tool 'Returns a comprehensive list of all available Archicad API commands and brief descriptions,' identifying the exact verb, resource, and scope. It also distinguishes this from sibling tools by framing it as the discovery step for finding command names.

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?

Explicit step-by-step guidance is provided: 'STEP 1: Use this tool FIRST' and 'STEP 2: ... MUST use the archicad_get_command_schema tool.' It warns against guessing or hallucinating command names and names the specific alternative tool to use next, giving both when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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