kalei_dimensions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden, and it performs well by stating exactly what is returned and enumerating all ten values. It implicitly conveys a safe, side-effect-free lookup; the only omission is an explicit 'read-only/no side effects' statement, which the verb 'List' strongly implies.

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?

A single sentence front-loads the verb and resource, then packs the exact 10-item enumeration without filler or repetition. Every word contributes to the caller's understanding.

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?

This is a zero-parameter, static metadata tool with no output schema, and the description fully specifies the output values. An agent can invoke it immediately with no missing information.

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, so the input schema already fully covers the calling contract. There is nothing for the description to add about parameters, matching the baseline of 4 for parameterless tools.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('the 10 cognitive dimensions KALEI measures'), and enumerates every dimension. There is no ambiguity about what the tool returns, and it is clearly distinct from the run/profile/model sibling tools.

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 cataloging purpose is immediately clear, so the intended use is obvious: call this tool when you need KALEI's dimension list. No sibling tool overlaps with this listing function, so explicit alternatives are not needed, though the description does not spell out when not to use it.

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