List Interfaces

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It only states the action without mentioning side effects (none likely), authorization needs, or performance implications. For a list operation, this is minimal but lacks transparency.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb 'List' and resource 'interfaces', followed by illustrative examples. 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?

Given no parameters or output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. It might lack details on output format or dynamic nature of the list, but for a simple enumeration it is mostly complete.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by listing example interface names, enriching the meaning of what will be returned. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 tool lists communication interfaces, with specific examples (BidCos-RF, HmIP-RF, VirtualDevices). It is distinct from sibling tools like list_devices or list_functions, which list different entities.

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 use for enumerating interfaces when needed. No explicit when-to-use or alternatives, but given no sibling duplicates this functionality, the clarity is sufficient. A small improvement would be stating it is a read-only inspection tool.

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