list_tags

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

Annotations cover read-only safety. Description adds scope ('all available') and domain context ('CommonTrace knowledge base'), but omits behavioral details like pagination, caching, or return value structure (though output schema exists to cover returns).

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 action verb. Every element earns its place: 'List' (action), 'all available' (scope), 'tags' (resource), 'CommonTrace knowledge base' (domain). Appropriate length for zero-parameter tool.

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 low complexity (0 params, read-only), presence of readOnlyHint annotation, and existing output schema, description sufficiently covers necessary context. Explains what is listed and from which domain system.

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?

Zero parameters present, establishing baseline 4. Description appropriately indicates unfiltered scope ('all available') which aligns with empty parameter schema.

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?

Specific verb 'List' + resource 'tags' + scope 'in the CommonTrace knowledge base'. Clearly distinguishes from trace-oriented siblings (amend_trace, get_trace, etc.) by specifying the target resource is tags, not traces.

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?

Implied usage through distinct resource naming (tags vs siblings' traces), but no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparison to alternatives mentioned in description.

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