list_elements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the cross-reference. It says nothing about return shape, ordering, pagination, or whether the list is static — notable gaps for even a simple listing tool. The only real behavior hint is that results feed into explain_element.

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 short sentence with no filler, and the key relationship to explain_element is placed immediately. It is efficient, though it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than optimally 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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description should at minimum characterize what a returned 'knowledge card' is and in what form the list comes back; it does neither. For a zero-argument discovery tool the bar is low, but the entry is only minimally complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter semantics are needed.

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?

States a clear verb ('List') and ties the resource to a named sibling ('knowledge cards available via explain_element'), which does separate it from element_sequence or list_enums. However, 'knowledge cards' is unexplained jargon — an agent cannot tell from the text whether these are docs, schemas, or examples. The purpose is implied rather than stated in domain terms.

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 cross-reference to explain_element implies the discovery workflow (list first, then explain a chosen element), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use is given, and no alternative discovery tools are ruled out. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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