List a target's tools

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds valuable context that it starts the server if needed without sending a tool call. This goes beyond what annotations provide, with no contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence adds side effects and prerequisites without redundancy.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description covers what is returned (names, descriptions, input schemas) and the side effect of starting the server. It also notes the prerequisite. Missing error handling is not essential for a listing tool.

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 100% with descriptive parameter text for both `tool` and `target`. The description adds only a minor clarification that `tool` returns just one, which is already implied by the schema. No significant extra meaning over 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?

States a specific action ('List') and a clear resource ('a relay_run target's real tools'), and spells out what is returned (names, descriptions, input schemas) plus the `tool` option to return one. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like relay_search or relay_probe.

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?

Provides a prerequisite ('Requires relay_stage') but does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when to use this instead of alternatives. The context is clear enough to infer use, but no exclusions or alternatives are named.

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