List Xcode schemes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the project/workspace scope but does not disclose return format, error behavior, or edge cases like empty scheme lists, which is acceptable given the annotations.

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, compact sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is informative; no filler or repetition of the title.

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 low complexity (one well-documented parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete to let an agent invoke the tool correctly. It would ideally mention that the return is a list of scheme names, but that is strongly implied by the phrase 'list all available schemes'.

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 schema description for 'projectPath' is clear and 100% coverage, so the description has no additional parameter burden. It does reinforce the parameter meaning by mentioning 'project or workspace', but adds no new syntactic or format details beyond the schema.

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'), the resource ('schemes'), and the scope ('Xcode project or workspace'). This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are focused on App Store Connect APIs and none mention Xcode schemes.

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 context of use is clear: when you need to enumerate schemes in an Xcode project or workspace. No alternatives are mentioned, but given the sibling list, there are no overlapping tools, so explicit exclusions are unnecessary.

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