bps_list_variables

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral cues. It only states 'list', implying read-only, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. Minimal transparency.

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?

Extremely concise (6 words) and front-loaded with purpose. However, conciseness sacrifices necessary detail, making it less useful overall.

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 4 parameters, no param descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It leaves the agent guessing about pagination, default values, domain meaning, and response structure.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for any of the 4 parameters. The words 'for a subject and domain' loosely map to subject_id and domain but provide no details on page, language, or allowed values. Fails to compensate for coverage gap.

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 precisely states the tool's action (list) and resource (official BPS variables) with scoping (subject and domain). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like bps_get_data (retrieves data) and bps_list_subjects (lists subjects).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no exclusions. The description provides no help in tool selection beyond the basic verb-noun combination.

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