extension.list

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 does not state whether the operation is read-only, what authentication or permissions are needed, how results are returned, or whether any side effects occur. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero structured behavioral hints.

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 fragment rather than a structured statement of purpose or usage. It is short, but that brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient front-loading of useful 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameters, the description should at least clarify what the tool returns and when it is appropriate. It only vaguely mentions the extension library and profile loads, leaving the agent to infer read-only behavior, return shape, and selection context.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meaning, and it does not introduce any parameter-related ambiguity.

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 identifies the resource ('extension library') and adds a secondary purpose ('what each profile loads'), but it omits a clear verb and is a sentence fragment. An agent can infer this is a listing tool from the name, yet the description does not explicitly state the action or scope.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Many sibling list tools exist (profile.list, credential.list, group.list, etc.), and the description gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusion conditions to distinguish extension.list from them.

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