Get Canvas List

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no behavioral details beyond what annotations provide, but with such simple annotations and a simple read operation, the burden is already met. No contradictions with annotations.

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 a single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes zero words. It is concise and clear.

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 tool is simple, has no parameters, and is fully described by the one-liner. The annotations cover the read-only nature. There is no output schema, but for a 'get all' list, the description is adequate. A slightly more detailed description of what 'canvases' means could push it to 5, but overall it is fairly complete.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% automatically. The description doesn't need to explain parameters because there are none, so this is a baseline 3. No additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 and resource: 'Get all canvases available in OBS.' It clearly states the action (Get), the resource (canvases), and the scope (all available in OBS). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'obs-get-scene-list' by using 'canvases' instead of 'scenes', indicating a different concept.

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 'Get all canvases available in OBS' simply states the function. It doesn't explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives, but the purpose is straightforward and the tool name is self-explanatory. There's no mention of when not to use it, but given the simplicity, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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