list_data_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral transparency. It only says 'List item names' with no details about side effects, error handling, return format, or performance implications. It does not contradict any annotations (none exist) but provides minimal disclosure.

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?

A single sentence with no filler words, making it structurally concise. However, it is too sparse for the tool's complexity, as critical parameter details are absent. It is not verbose, so it scores well on conciseness, but the failure to include necessary information reduces its effectiveness.

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?

The tool has a required parameter and an output schema, but the description neither explains the valid 'data_type' values nor the effect of 'limit'. An agent cannot determine what input to provide or what output to expect beyond the bare name listing. Incomplete even for a simple read operation.

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 coverage is 0% and the description gives no explanation of the two parameters ('data_type' and 'limit'). Without any description of what values are valid or how they affect the result, an agent cannot correctly call the tool.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('item names in a bpy.data collection'), but does not clarify which collection corresponds to 'data_type'. It is distinguishable from sibling 'list_data_types' (which lists type names, not item names), though not explicitly differentiated.

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, what arguments to pass, or how it differs from alternatives. Only a bare statement of function, with no context about typical use cases or exclusions.

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