list_knowledge_bases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to confirm safety, and openWorldHint is provided. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's purpose; it fails to mention the default limit (20) implied by the schema, nor does it clarify whether it returns all knowledge bases or only those accessible to the user. This is a notable gap for a listing tool.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's function. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the action and resource, earning a maximum score.

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 with one optional parameter, but the description lacks important context such as pagination behavior (the default limit) and the structure of returned data, especially since there is no output schema. While the schema provides the limit parameter, the description could be more explicit about what 'all' means given the limit, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema describes the single 'limit' parameter with a clear description and default value, giving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any parameter details, but since the schema is complete, the baseline of 3 applies. No extra semantic enrichment is provided.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'knowledge bases' and the scope 'available in the instance', clearly distinguishing it from sibling list tools. It precisely names the entity type, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 this tool is used when you need to enumerate knowledge bases, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. There are many sibling list tools, but the description does not say 'use this for X, not Y'.

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