list_worldbook_entries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the important detail that content bodies are excluded, which is a meaningful behavioral trait. Though it doesn't mention pagination or authentication, 'list' implies a safe read operation, and the description is transparent about its main limitation.

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, compact sentence ('List worldbook entries without their content bodies.') that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no redundant words or filler, achieving maximum efficiency.

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 with one parameter and an output schema, so the description covers the core function and the content-body omission. However, the unexplained parameter creates a gap that leaves the description incomplete. A brief note about what 'world_info_id' represents would elevate it to full completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain 'world_info_id' at all. It neither states what this ID refers to nor how it might be obtained. Since there is only one required parameter, the lack of any semantic guidance leaves the agent without essential information for correct invocation.

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 action ('List') and resource ('worldbook entries'), with the key qualifier 'without their content bodies'. This distinguishes it from get_worldbook_entry (which presumably includes content) and search_worldbook_entries (which searches). The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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 phrase 'without their content bodies' implies this tool is for enumerating entries when content is not needed, contrasting with fetching a full entry. However, no sibling alternatives are explicitly named, and there is no explicit 'when not to use' guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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