list_instances

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and discloses the returned fields (name, version, loader, mod counts), plus the local-PC scope. It does not mention error conditions or output ordering, but the behavior of a simple list tool is well conveyed.

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 sentence that contains the action, target, scope, and result contents. Every word adds value and there is no redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what the tool does, what it returns, and where it operates. No critical information is missing.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns rather than parameter details, which are nonexistent.

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 ('List'), names the exact resource ('CurseForge Minecraft instances'), and scopes it to the local PC. The parenthetical return fields further distinguish it from sibling listing tools like list_worlds and list_mods.

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 makes the tool's context clear: it is for enumerating Minecraft instances on this machine. Sibling tools target different resources (worlds, mods, configs, logs), so no overlap is likely; however, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer get_instance for detailed single-instance information.

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