list-sounds

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

The description declares the tool is 'Read-only', a key behavioral trait. It also lists the fields returned. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and while it doesn't detail error conditions or performance, it sufficiently covers the read-only nature.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action and fields, followed by behavioral and usage context. No wasted words, every sentence serves a purpose.

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 (single parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It covers what is returned and the read-only nature. It could be slightly improved by specifying the output format (e.g., array of objects), but the listed fields provide sufficient detail.

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 100%, so the parameter 'sceneIdentifier' is already documented. The description adds marginal value by implying it refers to the scene containing the sounds, but does not provide additional format or constraints 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 the verb 'List' and resource 'AmbientSound on a scene', enumerating the fields returned. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by stating it's the 'inspect step before update-sounds / delete-sounds'.

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 when to use it (before modification) and references sibling tools update-sounds/delete-sounds. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives for other scenarios.

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