list_instincts

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

The description discloses a read operation and mentions returning confidence scores, but lacks details on authentication, side effects, or behavior when no instincts are loaded. Without annotations, more info would be helpful.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded and concise. However, it could briefly mention the output structure without sacrificing conciseness.

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 no output schema, the description is adequate but does not specify if the list includes identifiers or if it is sorted/paginated. It mentions confidence scores but not other potential 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?

No parameters exist, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter meaning beyond what is evident from the schema, which is fine but not additive.

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 that the tool lists loaded instincts with confidence scores, using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like approve_instinct or reject_instinct.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as before approving/rejecting an instinct. No context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

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