actor_list

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

Even without annotations, the description fully conveys the tool's behavior: it lists actors (read-only, no side effects). It adds context about the active world and the output structure, including a practical usage tip for linking.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core action and essential output details. Every sentence adds value without extraneous 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?

For a parameterless tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient information: what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use the output. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

There are no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate given the empty input schema with 100% coverage.

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 'List all actors in the active Foundry world', specifying the verb (list), resource (actors), and scope (active world). It also details return fields and provides a usage hint for linking, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle other entity types.

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 implicitly tells when to use this tool (when listing actors) and provides explicit guidance on using the output (Actor.<_id> as UUID for journal links). Since no sibling tool lists actors, alternatives are not needed.

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