photoshop_list_datasets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It discloses the return shape as JSON with { ok, summary, details }, and states the precondition that an active document with variables/data sets must exist. This gives an agent a clear model of what the tool does and what it needs, though it does not explicitly declare side-effect-free behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core operation comes first, followed by use context, return shape, and preconditions. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers what it does, when to use it, what it returns, and what preconditions apply. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already fully explains the optional document_id parameter, including its provenance and why it matters. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but with complete schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List the data sets defined on the active document', with a menu path for disambiguation. This clearly differentiates it from related siblings like photoshop_import_datasets and photoshop_generate_from_datasets, which apply or modify data sets rather than list them.

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 says 'Use when: before applying data sets or debugging a data-driven template', giving concrete invocation context. It does not enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the stated use cases are sufficient for an agent to select this tool over apply/import/generation siblings.

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