list_available_configs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states the output (a list with short descriptions), which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm no side effects, auth requirements, or other behavioral nuances. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a brief clarifying sentence about the role of configuration types. Every sentence earns its place with 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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, clear purpose) and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It explains what the tool returns and gives context about configuration types. It could benefit from a note about how it relates to get_config_info, but that is more of a usage guideline gap.

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 no parameters, and the schema confirms this with 100% coverage. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4. It adds no parameter-related detail, which 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 all available clearskies configuration types and provides a short description for each. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('configuration types'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_available_backends or list_available_columns.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_config_info or other list_available_* tools. It does not mention that this is a discovery tool for exploring available configuration types before using a specific config.

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