list_screens

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and the active-screen detail adds useful state awareness, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, requires no permissions, or how the active screen is determined. The output schema covers return shape.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and return fields without repetition or filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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 list tool with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. The only minor ambiguity is the phrase 'which screen is active' — it does not clarify whether active is global or per region — but the output schema likely resolves this.

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 the input schema is already empty, so there is nothing meaningful left to explain about parameters. Per the zero-parameter baseline, this is appropriately handled.

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 and resource: 'List screens' and names the exact returned information (names, region IDs, active screen). It separates itself from mutation siblings like activate_screen and upsert_screen, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the retrieval sibling get_dashboard.

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 verb 'List' implies when to use the tool, but the description gives no explicit context about when to prefer it over alternatives or how it fits into workflows with siblings like update_region or get_dashboard. A stronger description would say 'use this to view current screens before updating a region' or similar.

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