List house-style generators

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds useful context beyond that: generators are pre-assigned to slots with points and difficulty, and follow a specific round format. While it does not explain ordering or pagination, those are minor given the zero-parameter 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose and result shape, the second explains the round format, and the third gives the downstream action. The most important information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema present, the description is complete. It explains what the list contains, how it relates to Repovive's round format, and what to do with the results. No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema leaves nothing undocumented and the baseline is 4. The description does not attempt to describe parameters, which is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('house-style generators'), and adds concrete detail about what each generator carries (round slot A-G, points, difficulty). It differentiates this from generic template listing by tying it to Repovive's published round format and the downstream builder.

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 description gives clear context by explaining these generators feed directly into repovive_build_house_round, so an agent knows when to call this tool. It does not explicitly name alternative list tools or state when not to use it, but the domain-specific purpose is clearly implied.

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