scl_list_goose

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a valuable behavioral trait: the tool cross-references IED and Communication sections and flags publishers without GSE addresses. This is genuinely useful diagnostic behavior that an agent would not otherwise know. It doesn't describe return format details, but the output schema exists to cover that.

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 with zero wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second adds a genuinely useful diagnostic insight about silent GOOSE transmission failures. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

With an output schema present and only one trivial parameter, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers the diagnostic value-add (flagging publishers without GSE addresses) which is the most important behavioral context. Completeness is strong for this tool's complexity level.

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?

There's only 1 parameter (path) and schema description coverage is 0%. However, the parameter is trivially self-explanatory — 'path' to an SCD/SCL file. The description doesn't need to elaborate on what a path is. Baseline for a single obvious parameter is decent given the simplicity.

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 a specific verb ('List') with a resource ('GOOSE publishers / GSEControl blocks') and specifies the key outputs (dataset and network addressing). It distinguishes itself from siblings like scl_list_reports and scl_list_datasets by focusing specifically on GOOSE publishers and GSE addressing.

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 provides a clear context for when to use this tool: when you need GOOSE publisher configuration, including their GSE address assignment. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but the domain is specific enough that usage context is reasonably clear. It doesn't mention exclusions, so not a 5.

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