altair_list_repository

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the requirement for the HTTP bridge extension and the repository living inside a running Studio session, which is important behavioral context. It does not mention side effects or return format, but adds value beyond the schema.

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 three sentences: purpose, requirement, and examples. It is concise, front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without waste.

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 a single optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, prerequisite, and parameter usage. It could be more complete by mentioning return format or error behavior, but for a simple list tool it is sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds significant meaning by providing example paths (e.g., '//Local Repository' or '//Samples/data') and indicating the format, which clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's default value.

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 tool lists folders/entries in the Altair AI Studio repository, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like altair_read_repository_entry or altair_store_csv_to_repository which perform different operations.

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 provides context (requires HTTP bridge extension, lives inside running Studio session) and example paths, guiding when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, leaving some room for improvement.

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