list_encodings

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that it lists exactly 25 supported encodings with their metadata. No side effects are implied, and the description aligns with the read-only nature.

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?

Two sentences, both dense with information. The first states the action and output contents; the second explains the use case. No unnecessary words.

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 the simplicity of the tool, the description fully covers its purpose and usage. The output schema exists, so the description need not list return fields.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description correctly omits parameter details, as there are none.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('encodings'), specifying the exact content ('name, aliases, description') and count (25). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like detect_encoding or convert_encoding.

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: 'Use this to find the correct encoding name for read/write/convert operations.' This provides clear context for selecting this tool over alternatives.

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