list_game_snapshot_path_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('List') and scopes to the current build, but does not disclose return format, sorting, or potential edge cases. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, the object, and the scope in a direct manner.

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 zero parameters, and an output schema exists, so the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what is listed and from where. The only minor gap is not mentioning how profiles relate to sibling tools, but this is not essential for a read-only list operation.

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 schema coverage is 100% by default. Per rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline of 4. The description adds context about what is being listed, which is sufficient.

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 'List' with a clear resource 'reusable target-path profiles' and scope 'current ExileCore build'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_known_game_snapshot_paths by focusing on profiles rather than raw paths.

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 usage (when you want to see saved profiles) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as save_game_snapshot_path_profile or list_known_game_snapshot_paths. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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