edge_list_functions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The word 'list' implies a read-only operation, which is helpful, but the description does not mention whether authentication is required, what information is returned (names only vs. full details), or how the results are ordered. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but leaves some uncertainty.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and target. Every word contributes, and there is no redundancy or filler. It is appropriately minimal for such a straightforward tool.

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's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description conveys the essential purpose. It could have added a note about what 'available' means (e.g., functions deployed to the project) or the return format, but for a list-all tool, the description is reasonably complete. The minor gaps do not significantly impede understanding.

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 score is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed since the tool takes no arguments. This aligns with the rule that 0 parameters earns a baseline 4.

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 'List available Edge Functions' clearly states a specific verb (list) and resource (Edge Functions), distinguishing it from sibling tools like edge_invoke_function, edge_deploy_function, and edge_remove_function. The purpose is unambiguous and directly reflects the tool name.

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 implies usage by the verb 'list' — this is the read-only enumeration tool, in contrast to invoking, deploying, or removing functions. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria, so guidance is only implied rather than stated.

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