List properties by class name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a meaningful detail ('excludes source_http_request') and signals a read-only list operation via 'Lists'. However, it doesn't describe behavior for nonexistent classes, ordering, or the exact response format.

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 that front-loads the action and object, with the key exclusion parenthetically appended. Every word earns its place and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 simple listing tool with no output schema, the description conveys the core return value and a key exception. However, absent annotations, it doesn't cover edge-case behavior (e.g., unknown class names) or explicitly describe the response shape beyond 'property names', leaving some gaps.

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 input schema fully documents the single parameter (className: string, minLength 1, case-insensitive), so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Lists'), identifies the exact resource ('JSON Schema property names for an Elephant class'), and explicitly notes an exclusion ('excludes source_http_request'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like listClassesByDataGroup or getPropertySchema.

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 implies the tool is used when you need property names for an Elephant class, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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