list_ui_actions

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

With readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true annotations, the description adds a meaningful behavioral constraint: it requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true. However, it does not disclose other potential behaviors such as pagination, return format, or what happens when no table filter is provided. The added value is modest but non-conflicting.

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 front-loads the core purpose and includes a bonus prerequisite. No redundant words or repetition of schema details.

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 description is adequate for a low-complexity list tool with a rich schema and safety annotations, but it omits some context: it does not state that the table parameter is optional, nor describe what the returned data looks like (though an output schema is absent). It does add the SCRIPTING_ENABLED requirement, which is valuable.

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?

All 4 parameters are documented in the schema with clear descriptions (type, limit, table, active), so the schema already provides high coverage. The description does not add additional meaning about parameters beyond saying 'for a table', which mirrors the table filter. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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') and resource ('UI Actions'), and clarifies the resource by enumerating the types (buttons, context menus, related links). It also scopes the operation to 'for a table', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_ui_action (single record) and create/update_ui_action.

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 provides clear context: this tool lists UI Actions, and it mentions a prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true) that guides when it can be used. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the distinction from get/create/update siblings is implied by the action verb. Lacks an explicit 'use this instead of X' statement.

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