list_properties

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses behavior such as sorting by frequency, no limit, pagination offset, and important edge cases about nested YAML handling (rejecting writes but allowing reads). It also states 'truncated is always false'.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and key details. Every sentence adds essential information without 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 tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned (keys, counts, types, sorted), the pagination mechanism, and edge cases like nested YAML. No gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining offset behavior ('offset still pages; truncated is always false') and implying the effect of include_tags, which are not in schema descriptions.

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 tool lists all frontmatter property keys with counts and value types, sorted by frequency. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by comparing to list_tags and mentioning arbitrary properties.

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 provides clear context: 'the vault's property schema' and mentions pagination and no limit. It implicitly differentiates from tools like list_tags and get_property, but lacks an explicit when-to-use vs alternatives statement.

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