list_module_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It implies read-only behavior by stating 'list', but does not explicitly mention safety, idempotency, pagination, or other traits. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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: one stating the action and one explaining the use case. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words or redundancies.

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 (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to invoke it correctly. It explains what it does and when to use it.

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 only parameter (moduleSlug) has a schema description that covers its purpose. The tool description does not add extra meaning or constraints beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and no additional value is provided.

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 'List all fields defined on a module' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_modules (lists modules) and list_records (lists records). The additional context about being useful before create/update operations reinforces the purpose.

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 advises using this tool before creating or updating records to understand module structure, which is clear context. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling tools and purpose implicitly guide the agent.

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