List saved designs

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact beyond the annotations — results are ordered newest first — but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or what a saved design record contains.

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?

A single sentence with no waste, front-loading the resource and appending the ordering constraint. Nothing could be removed without losing 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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it returns and in what order. It is slightly thin on whether the list is unbounded or paginated, which is the one thing an agent might need before calling it.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden to carry; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description correctly does not invent argument documentation.

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) and resource (saved designs), plus an ordering guarantee. It is clearly distinguishable from aikea_get_design (single fetch) and from aikea_list_options/list_fabricators by resource, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb: use this to enumerate saved designs before fetching one with aikea_get_design. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite guidance, and no mention of how this differs from aikea_design or aikea_build.

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