document_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well by describing the returned item shape, the ref format for saved versus unsaved documents, and the important rule that other tools work on the active document. It does not explicitly state read-only or side-effect behavior, but the list semantics are clear.

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 definition is front-loaded with the core action and then efficiently provides the returned item shape and ref semantics. Every sentence contributes useful information, especially because there is no output schema.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by documenting the returned object structure and the meaning of key fields such as ref, is_active, is_saved, and design_type. It is complete enough for an agent to call and use the result correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The description appropriately focuses on returned fields and ref usage instead.

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 verb and resource: list the documents open in Fusion. It also distinguishes this tool from document_activate, document_save, and document_close by explaining how to use the returned ref with those tools.

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 gives clear usage context: pass each ref to document_activate, document_save, or document_close, and note that other tools operate on the active document. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but the intended workflow is clear.

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