get_fonts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return type ('Returns a list of font identifiers') and the tool's purpose for discovery, which is adequate behavioral context for a read-only list operation. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits or error conditions.

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?

Three sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and examples. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 (0 parameters, no annotations, but has an output schema), the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, how to use it, and references the output format, which is sufficient since the output schema will detail the return values.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's purpose and output, which adds value beyond the empty schema.

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 specific verb ('List') and resource ('all available pyfiglet font names'), and distinguishes from its sibling tool generate_banner by explaining the relationship. It provides concrete examples of font identifiers like 'slant', 'standard', 'block'.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('Use this to discover which fonts... are available') and provides a clear alternative ('that can be used with generate_banner'), giving complete guidance on tool selection versus its sibling.

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