list_options

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Discover' without noting read-only status, authentication needs, or rate limits. The minimal description fails to inform the agent about side effects or constraints.

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, well-front-loaded sentence that gets straight to the point. Every word contributes to purpose without fluff.

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 the lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter descriptions, a comprehensive description should clarify return structure and parameter usage. The current one-liner leaves significant gaps in understanding what the tool returns and how to use it effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning the description does not explain the two parameters ('kind', 'include_paths'). The schema itself has no descriptions or enums. The tool's description adds no semantic value beyond parameter names, leaving the agent guessing about valid values and effects.

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 what the tool does: discover filter keys, group_by values, built-in metrics, and contract paths. This distinguishes it from sibling tools 'get_histogram' and 'get_metrics' which retrieve data rather than listing options.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria. The description only states functionality, not usage context.

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