tracecat_list_case_fields

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation ('list all') and adds context about workspace scoping. It does not contradict the lack of annotations, and for a simple list tool with no parameters, it is sufficiently transparent about behavior.

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, complete sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value. Ideal conciseness.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It specifies the scope (workspace-scoped) and the resource type. It could optionally mention what the return data looks like, but this is a minor gap for a list 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific information (none needed). Per guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets this standard.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'all custom case field definitions', and adds the qualifier 'workspace-scoped schema for case extras', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like tracecat_list_cases (which lists cases) and the create/update/delete case field tools.

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?

While the description is self-contained and implies usage (listing field definitions for case extras), it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tracecat_list_cases) or when not to use it. The workspace-scoped context is helpful but not a complete guideline.

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