list_plants

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It conveys a read operation and that only active plants are returned, but does not explain the meaning of 'active', how location_id/limit affect results, or any response-shape expectations.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repeated schema content. Every word contributes to stating what the tool returns.

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?

The tool is simple, parameters are fully documented, and the description names the core returned data. However, with no annotations or output schema, and several sibling plant tools, it would benefit from clarifying when to list vs. search and what 'active' means.

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 already documents both parameters completely, so the description does not need to add much. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('active plants'), and lists the included data fields (species, locations, care statuses). It is clearly about plants rather than locations, but it does not explicitly distinguish listing from search_plants.

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 a general listing use case but gives no guidance on when to prefer this over search_plants, get_plant_details, or other siblings. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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