list_modules_editor

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'editor auth' as a context, but does not explain what that entails, nor does it describe return format, ordering, pagination, or error conditions. For a list operation, more detail could be expected.

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 that directly states the action and scope. Every word is purposeful, with no redundancy.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate for basic purpose but lacks usage guidance and deeper behavioral context. It does convey the essential function and a hint about auth, but more detail on return behavior would improve 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 has one parameter (page_id) with no description, and the description only indirectly references it via 'on a page'. This adds some meaning but does not explicitly explain that page_id is the identifier of the page whose modules are listed, nor does it provide format details.

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 all modules') and the scope ('on a page'), with a parenthetical qualifier about editor auth. It distinguishes from siblings like get_module (single module) but not clearly from list_page_modules, which may be a close sibling.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_page_modules. The editor auth hint is implicit but no when-not conditions or alternative tool names are provided.

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