edgegate_list_promptpacks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the output format and the effect of include_unpublished, which is useful. However, it omits details like the default behavior of showing unpublished packs unless excluded, whether results are paginated, or any access/error handling. This is acceptable for a simple list tool but leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then provides output format and a key parameter tip. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy with the schema.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary purpose, output structure, and the main parameter behavior. It lacks explicit notes on error cases or pagination, but given the low complexity, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 50%; workspace_id is undocumented in the schema and tool description, though its role is inferable from context. The description adds a small semantic nuance for include_unpublished ('hide draft packs') beyond the schema's 'published=false', but does not fully compensate for the unexplained workspace_id or add detail like UUID format meaning.

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 action (List all promptpacks), identifies the resource (promptpacks), and scopes it to an EdgeGate workspace. It also mentions the return format (markdown table) with specific columns, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like edgegate_list_devices and edgegate_list_eval_packs.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for listing promptpacks in a workspace, and provides parameter usage guidance ('Use include_unpublished=false to hide draft packs'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the tool's purpose is distinct among siblings, so it is clear when this is the appropriate choice.

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