list_available_pdfs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool lists PDFs, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose what 'available' means, whether the list is static or dynamic, or any side effects. The description is honest but lacks depth.

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?

A single sentence of 8 words with no redundancy. Every word is necessary. It is appropriately brief for a parameterless tool.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not describe the return format (e.g., file names, paths, IDs). The tool is simple, but the agent needs to know what the output looks like to use it effectively, especially to feed into the sibling 'read_doc_contents'. This gap reduces completeness.

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 is fully descriptive. The description adds slight value by stating the list is of 'all available PDF documents', implying no filtering. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and this is met.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('all available PDF documents that can be read'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'read_doc_contents' by implying the listing is a precursor to reading, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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. It is implied that listing is a discovery step before reading, but there are no explicit usage contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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