list_knowledge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It only states that the tool returns a list of topics with summaries, but fails to disclose that it is a read-only operation, any potential side effects, or other behavioral traits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding beyond the basic function.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a return description. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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 tool with low complexity, the description is complete. It explains the return value (dictionary with list of topics and summaries) and provides references to related sibling tools for additional needs. The presence of an output schema further reduces the need for return value details. The description adequately covers the tool's 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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for no parameters. The description adds no additional parameter information, which is acceptable given the absence of 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 'List all saved knowledge topics' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining that get_knowledge_topic retrieves full content and get_all_knowledge retrieves everything, making its scope explicit.

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 guidance on when to use alternative tools (get_knowledge_topic for full content, get_all_knowledge for everything at once). While it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool, the alternatives are clearly presented, making usage context clear.

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