list_clusters

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only implies a read-only operation ('list'). It does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or performance characteristics. The description is not contradictory but adds no behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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 sentence with no wasted words. Every element ('list,' 'all,' 'topic clusters,' 'bindings') is necessary and front-loaded. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple list tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers the main purpose and scope ('all'). However, it could mention if results are paginated or if there are any limitations, but given the simplicity, it is complete enough.

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, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters since there are none. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description appropriately describes what the tool does.

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 topic clusters with their bindings,' specifying the verb 'list,' the resource 'topic clusters,' and the inclusion of 'bindings.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'show_cluster' or 'summarize_cluster' that target individual clusters or summaries.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'show_cluster' or 'list_claims.' The description is functional but lacks context about scenarios or exclusions, making it minimally adequate.

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