list_attachments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to repeat safety. It adds useful context about the identifier's accepted forms and the purpose of the returned ids. However, it does not disclose potential error conditions, pagination, or ordering behaviors, which the annotation does not cover.

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 two concise sentences with zero filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds the key parameter detail and cross-references to related tools, all in an efficient manner.

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 an output schema (not shown) and readOnly annotation, the description covers the essential inputs, outputs, and usage context. It explains what the returned ids are for and how to specify the target item/location, making it self-sufficient for the agent.

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 input schema provides only a bare string 'identifier' with no description. The description compensates fully by explaining that identifier can be an assetId, alias field, name, or a location name/path, giving complete semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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's function: 'List an item's (or location's) attachments with their ids'. It specifies the resource (attachments) and the verb (list), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by noting these ids are the handle for get_attachment/rename_attachment/delete_attachment.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: to obtain attachment ids needed for subsequent attachment operations. It names the related tools but does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like attach_document; however, the integration with sibling tools is explicit and helpful.

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