get_all_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It warns about the large unfiltered response size and advises filtering, which is important behavioral context beyond the schema. It doesn't mention pagination or rate limits, but the warning is the most critical behavioral trait for this list endpoint, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, includes an essential warning, and names the alternative tool. Every sentence contributes value.

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 output schema exists, return values don't need explanation. The description covers the essential usage context: it's a list tool with optional filters, warns about the large response, and directs to a more specific sibling tool. This is complete for a filtered-list tool with fully documented schema.

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%, with each parameter already having a detailed description, especially the attributes enum. The description adds a hint to use status, asset_class, or exchange for narrowing, but doesn't add new syntax or detail beyond the schema, so the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Get all available assets with optional filtering." It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool get_asset by stating "To look up a single asset, use get_asset instead," making the scope clear.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance by warning that the unfiltered response is very large and instructing to always narrow results with status, asset_class, or exchange. It also names the alternative tool (get_asset) for single-asset lookups, which is clear exclusion guidance.

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