list_available_functional

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral expectations. It clarifies that functional utilities are helper functions and decorators and indicates the tool returns a list with short descriptions. However, it does not disclose details such as sort order, result size, or network/backend access. For a read-only list operation, 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: the first clearly states the action and outcome, the second provides helpful background on what functional utilities are. There is no wasted text, and all information earns its place.

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?

This is a simple zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema. The description covers the tool's purpose and gives enough context about the domain. It does not need to explain return values due to the output schema, nor parameters. It is complete for its complexity, though it might have benefited from a pointer to get_functional_info for more detail.

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 description does not need to explain parameter meanings. The schema is empty, and the description adds context about what is being listed, which is sufficient. The 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies.

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') and resource ('all available clearskies functional utilities') with a defined scope ('with a short description of each'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_functional_info and other list_available_* tools by focusing specifically on functional utilities.

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 states what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this list versus alternatives (e.g., get_functional_info for detailed info about a specific utility). Usage is implied—users wanting an overview of functional utilities would use this—but no exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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