list_sections

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

The description is minimal and does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or error conditions. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full responsibility for transparency, but it only states the function without any contextual safety or behavior details.

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-structured sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it efficient for an AI to parse.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks specifics about the output format (e.g., list of section names, counts file paths) or example usage. It could be more informative about what the agent can expect.

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 schema already provides a complete description of the single parameter 'exportPath'. The description reiterates the concept of an 'export package' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 tool lists sections from a Design OS export package, including component counts and available files. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('sections'), and the provided sibling tools (e.g., 'read_component', 'read_export_file') indicate that this tool is distinct for obtaining an overview.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., 'read_export_package', 'get_migration_context'). It does not mention prerequisites, when to avoid it, or how it complements other tools.

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