List reusable blocks (patterns)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful domain context about the nature of reusable blocks and their global effect when edited, which goes beyond the annotations. It does not describe return format or pagination, but given the annotated safety profile, this is acceptable.

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 concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds a clarifying note about the domain. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 simple list operation with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and the nature of the listed items. It does not mention return format or ordering, but these are not critical for a straightforward list tool, and the annotated safety profile covers side effects.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage for the single optional parameter site_id, including its behavior and fallback logic. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but since the schema is thorough, the baseline score 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 clearly states the action ('List') and the specific resource ('the site's reusable blocks / synced patterns'), and differentiates them from regular block types by explaining they are fragments reused across pages. It also adds a clarifying behavioral note that editing one changes all instances, which helps distinguish this from list_block_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 implies the tool is for retrieving reusable blocks but does not explicitly state when to choose this over similar tools like list_block_types or get_content. There is no mention of exclusions, alternatives, or typical use cases, so the guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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