list_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns metadata, but lacks details on behavioral traits such as response format, pagination, rate limits, or error handling. The mention of 'unified mode' adds some context but is vague.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to understand 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 has 0 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like what 'metadata' includes or how 'unified mode' affects the output, which could be important for an agent.

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 has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter semantics, but this is acceptable given the lack of parameters, aligning with the baseline for 0 parameters.

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 ('Return') and resource ('metadata for all exposed tools'), specifying the scope with '(unified mode)'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'call_tool' by focusing on listing rather than invoking tools, though it doesn't explicitly mention this distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for retrieving tool metadata, but there's no mention of prerequisites, context, or comparison with the sibling 'call_tool'.

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