pyhf_list_patches

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses the core action (list patches) and mentions the required file (patchset.json), but does not discuss behavior like error handling or whether it's read-only. Simplicity and presence of output schema make this adequate.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the action and includes key context. No extraneous 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 tool's simplicity (1 param, has output schema), the description covers the essential context: what is listed, from what source. Could mention the output type implicitly via schema, but overall 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description only adds that the directory must contain patchset.json, not clarifying the parameter's type or format. The meaning of workspace_dir is partially inferred but not explicit.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists signal patches (model points) from a downloaded published-likelihood directory containing patchset.json, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hepdata_download_likelihood.

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?

Implies the tool should be used after downloading a likelihood directory, but does not explicitly state when to use or when not, nor does it mention alternatives. Siblings are provided but not referenced.

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