get_capabilities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Describe' implies a read-only introspection operation, and mentioning 'supported operations' indicates the kind of information returned. Still, it does not state side-effect freedom, output format, or adapter-specific context.

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?

A single, tightly worded sentence conveys the tool's purpose with no filler. Every word earns its place and the core concept is front-loaded.

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 introspection tool, the description covers what the tool returns and its scope. It omits any detail about response structure, but the simple nature of the tool makes this a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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 an empty schema, so no parameter documentation is needed. Baseline 4 applies because no parameter semantics are required for correct invocation.

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 ('Describe') and a clear resource ('the configured adapter and supported operations'). It clearly distinguishes this introspection tool from siblings like list_forms or get_field, which act on domain data rather than tool capabilities.

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: call this tool when you need to know what the current adapter supports. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving some room for inference.

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