List reusable blocks (patterns)

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint true and destructiveHint false, so the description only needs to add context; it does add the useful note that editing a reusable block changes every occurrence. It does not, however, disclose list-specific behavior such as pagination, ordering, or return shape.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and object; the second sentence earns its place by explaining the synced-pattern behavior. No filler or repetition.

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 single optional-parameter list operation with read-only annotations, this is nearly complete; it covers purpose and domain consequences. The main gap is no explicit output format or filtering/sorting details, though the tool name and list semantics make the absence tolerable.

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 site_id parameter is already fully documented; the description adds no further parameter semantics, earning the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), resource ('reusable blocks / synced patterns'), and scope ('the site's'), and explains what these fragments are. It does not explicitly differentiate from the closely named sibling list_block_patterns, so it stops short of 5.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives; the sibling list_block_patterns could be confused with 'patterns'. No exclusions or routing to other list tools are given.

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