list_spl_commands

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not explicitly mention that the operation is read-only or safe. However, the nature of a list operation is implied to be non-destructive. The description lacks details about permissions or rate limits, which are absent from annotations.

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 clear and front-loaded with the purpose. It includes a bulleted list of output fields, but could be slightly more concise. Overall well-structured.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (command name, description, example) and its relationship to get_spl_reference. It is complete enough for a simple list tool.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The schema coverage is 100% (empty schema), and the description does not need to add parameter details. No additional semantic value required.

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 it lists common SPL commands with descriptions, and distinguishes from the sibling get_spl_reference by noting that this list includes only common commands while get_spl_reference supports many more.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool (to get common SPL commands) and provides an alternative (get_spl_reference) for a wider set, giving the agent clear guidance on tool selection.

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