list_tools_for_scope

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It adequately implies a read-only operation (listing) but does not explicitly state side effects, authorization requirements, or what happens with invalid scopes. The behavior is predictable for a list tool, but the description could be more transparent.

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 concise with four short sentences. It is front-loaded with the purpose, followed by usage instructions, a list of scopes, and the wildcard option. No extraneous information.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It explains the purpose, how to use the parameter, and valid values. It could mention that the output is a list of tool names, but this is implied and not a critical gap.

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 description adds significant value beyond the input schema. While the schema describes the 'scopes' parameter with an example, the description lists all valid scope values and the wildcard option, providing essential context for correct usage.

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', the resource 'available MCP tools', and the filter 'by delegation scope'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools as the only tool for listing tools by scope, and provides a specific list of valid scopes.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Pass your delegation scopes to see which tools you can use' and mentions using ['*'] for all tools. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, though the use case is straightforward.

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