list_timelines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the read-only action ('List') and reveals an additional behavioral trait (identifying the current timeline). It does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness or side-effect freedom, but the verb 'List' implies a safe query, and it adds the scoping context of the open project.

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 with no filler: it states exactly what the tool does and what it identifies. Every word contributes, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters), the presence of an output schema, and the clear description, the definition is complete. An agent knows what the tool does, what scope it operates in, and that it provides the current timeline in the result.

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 baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are none, but it does clarify the operation's scope ('in the open project'), which is relevant for an agent understanding what the tool acts on.

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 'List' with a clear resource 'every timeline in the open project' and adds a distinctive behavior 'identify the current one'. This distinguishes it from siblings like timeline_overview or open_timeline, as it enumerates all timelines and marks the active one.

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: use this when you need a complete enumeration of timelines and the current one. However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusion cases (e.g., when to use timeline_overview instead), so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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