list_artifacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It fails to disclose important behavioral details such as pagination, result limits, default ordering, or performance characteristics of listing all artifacts. The claim 'List all artifact entities' may be misleading if there is an implicit limit.

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, concise sentence of 13 words that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. No wasted words or repetition. Every word earns its place.

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 three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details about response format, ordering, and pagination, which are important for completeness. Could be improved for better agent understanding.

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 baseline is 3. The description simply summarizes the filtering options (tool name, type, date) but does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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 the verb 'list' and the resource 'artifact entities', and mentions optional filtering by tool name, type, or date. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_artifact (single retrieval) by indicating it lists all artifacts, and filtering capabilities are indicated.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or explicit comparisons to sibling tools like search_nodes or boolean_search.

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