list_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. 'List' clearly implies a read-only operation, and the description reveals the exact output scope (every open document, with file path and modified state). It does not explicitly state authorization or error behavior, but for a simple list operation these are not critical.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'List' and immediately conveys the object and relevant 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool, the description is fully complete. It covers what is listed, the scope (every open document), and the returned attributes (file path, modified state). The presence of an output schema further reduces the need to explain return 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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty set), so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description correctly focuses on output rather than parameters, needing no additional compensation.

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 'every open FreeCAD document', and specifies the output includes file path and modified state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_objects and open_document.

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 purpose is immediately clear: use this to see all open documents. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, but the context is straightforward and doesn't require formal guidance. This earns a 4 rather than 5 due to lack of explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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