list_variables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does ('get a list') without mentioning permissions needed, pagination behavior, rate limits, or response format. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 a single, efficient sentence in Japanese that directly states the tool's purpose. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool's complexity (a list operation with three required parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like pagination, sorting, or error handling, nor does it explain the return values, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 has 100% description coverage (all three parameters are documented in Japanese), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining relationships between accountId, containerId, and workspaceId, or providing examples.

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 '指定されたワークスペースの変数一覧を取得します' (Get a list of variables for the specified workspace) clearly states the verb ('取得します' - get) and resource ('変数一覧' - list of variables), but it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_variable' which retrieves a single variable. The purpose is understandable but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_variable' (for single variables) or other list tools (e.g., 'list_tags', 'list_triggers'). It mentions the workspace scope but offers no explicit usage context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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