list_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it lists actions but does not explicitly confirm that the operation is read-only or side-effect free. It also lacks context about scope (e.g., all actions in the current scene or globally) or any performance implications. The minimal description leaves these behavioral traits implicit.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('List') and immediately specifies the scope ('all actions') and the key detail ('frame ranges'). It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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 available, the description is sufficient. It fully conveys what the tool does, and the output schema handles return value details. Nothing crucial is missing for an agent to invoke this correctly.

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, so the schema coverage is vacuously 100%. With no parameters to document, the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies given the zero-parameter context; there is nothing to augment.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('all actions') with additional detail ('frame ranges'), which is specific and distinguishes it from related tools like create_action or assign_action. It unambiguously tells an agent what this tool does.

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: if you need to see all actions and their frame ranges, this is the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it mention any context or exclusions. The guidance is implied but not articulated.

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