List build variants

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing that the tool executes './gradlew <module>:tasks' to inspect assemble tasks. This is a meaningful behavioral detail—it indicates a background Gradle invocation—while remaining consistent with read-only semantics.

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, front-loaded sentence. It clearly states the primary action and the mechanism, with no wasted words or redundancy. Every element 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 listing tool with complete parameter schema, readOnlyHint annotation, and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's function and method. The return value (a list of variants) is implied by the verb 'List', and no additional behavioral context is needed.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides (module name and project root). It references 'module' but does not expand on its meaning or defaults.

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 build variants of a module, using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('build variants of a module'). It also explains the method (inspecting Gradle assemble tasks), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_modules' that list modules, not variants.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to list build variants of a Gradle module. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is unambiguous given the tool's purpose and sibling tools.

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