svm_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List', implying read-only behavior, but doesn't explicitly confirm idempotency, side effects, or permissions. For a list operation, this is minimal transparency.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it could include more context without becoming verbose, so not a perfect 5.

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 simple list tool with no output schema and two optional parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete. It mentions 'all memory blocks' but doesn't hint at filtering capabilities or return structure. The schema compensates, but the description could be richer.

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 100%, so the schema already documents 'slot_id' and 'tenant_id' filters. The tool description adds no additional meaning or usage context for these parameters, meeting baseline but not exceeding.

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 'List all memory blocks' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (memory blocks). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like svm_audit or svm_store by the action, but does not elaborate on scope or exclude other behaviors. A more specific description would rate 5.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like svm_audit or svm_stats. An agent has no context about appropriate scenarios or exclusions. This is a significant gap.

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