syscall_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns a 'complete syscall table' and takes a platform parameter. It does not mention authentication or side effects, but as a read-only listing, this is sufficient.

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?

The description is short and well-structured with a heading and bullet list. Every sentence adds value, no waste.

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 single optional parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains the return value ('Complete syscall table for the platform'). No further detail is needed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'platform' parameter with allowed values ('x86, x86_64/x64, arm/arm32, arm64/aarch64') and a default ('x86_64'), adding significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'List all system calls for a given platform,' specifying the verb 'list' and the resource 'system calls.' It distinguishes from sibling tool 'syscall_lookup' which presumably looks up a specific syscall.

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 description implies usage when a platform is given, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like syscall_lookup. No exclusions or when-not-to-use instructions are provided.

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