guides.list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds domain context about the guide content (blueprint principles, security, evaluation), which adds value beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 one sentence (18 words) that front-loads the core action ('List application guides') and immediately provides context. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary 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?

Although the tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, the description does not mention the return format, pagination, or fields of the listed guides. For a list operation, an agent may benefit from knowing the structure of results, which is missing.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% automatically. The description adds meaning by stating what the list contains (application guides for specific challenges), which is helpful for an agent. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and this description meets that baseline.

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 specifies the verb 'List' and the resource 'application guides,' and further details their content: 'show how blueprint principles apply to specific engineering challenges (security, evaluation).' This distinguishes it from siblings like guides.get and guides.search, which have different purposes.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (guides.get, guides.search). The parameterless signature implies it returns all guides, but this is only inferred. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are given.

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