list_components

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the burden. It states 'List', implying a read-only operation with no side effects. It also describes the output format ('one-line descriptions and family grouping'), but does not explicitly mention idempotency or permissions. For a listing tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 sentences, no redundant information. The first sentence states purpose and scope; the second gives usage guidance. Every sentence is valuable and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with 1 optional parameter and no output schema. The description mentions the output format ('one-line descriptions and family grouping') and positions it as a starting point. It does not cover pagination or performance, but for a listing tool of known components, this is nearly complete.

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 schema fully documents the platform parameter. The description reiterates the filtering option but does not add new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 verb 'List', the resource 'every Aurum component', and the scope 'in the current manifest'. It also specifies the output format: 'one-line descriptions and family grouping'. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_component (full details) and search (different use case).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this as a starting point for navigation; follow up with get_component for full details.' This provides clear context on when to use this tool and suggests an alternative sibling for more detail.

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