reaper_list_markers

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

Disclosure of known limitation about empty name field is critical for correct agent behavior. Annotations already indicate safe read-only operation, description adds valuable nuance.

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?

Very concise: one line for purpose, one line for output format, one line for id usage, one paragraph for limitation. No wasted words.

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?

Covers what tool returns (fields), how id is used (deletion/goto), and important caveat about name. Despite no output schema in provided input, description compensates fully.

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?

Single parameter response_format is fully documented in schema with description and enum. Description adds no additional semantics, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage.

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 'List all project markers and regions' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like reaper_add_marker and reaper_delete_marker.

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?

Clearly implies when to use (to see all markers/regions) but does not explicitly state when not to use. However, sibling tools cover add/delete/goto, so context is clear.

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