List Hermes Kanban API docs snapshot sections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the offline/vendored nature (no network refresh) and the specific data surfaced (slugs, provenance, wrapper mapping), providing some value beyond annotations. However, it does not describe return format, ordering, or pagination behavior of the listing.

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?

A single, dense sentence packs the full purpose and scope. It is front-loaded with the core action and enumerates the specific facets. Slightly verbose with the trailing 'without network refresh' but that qualifier is meaningful and earns its place. No wasted words or fluff.

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 this is a zero-parameter list tool with strong annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive) and an output schema present, the description is complete for its purpose. It tells the agent what it lists (sections, provenance, wrapper mapping) and the offline constraint. The 'planned wrapper mapping' hint gives useful context about what the tool reports.

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, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. With no parameters to document, the description's job is minimal on this dimension. The description accurately describes what data is returned (section slugs, snapshot provenance, planned wrapper mapping), giving the agent a clear sense of the output even without parameter detail.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('List bundled Hermes Kanban REST API documentation resources') and enumerates the facets exposed: section slugs, snapshot provenance, and planned wrapper mapping. It clearly distinguishes this tool from hermes_api_docs_list by scoping to 'bundled... without network refresh' (local snapshot vs possibly remote/refreshable docs).

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 network refresh' clearly signals this is the offline/bundled variant, and the sibling hermes_api_docs_list provides a natural contrast. It suggests when this is appropriate (reading bundled snapshot) versus alternatives, though it does not explicitly name the alternative tool or spell out when NOT to use it. Context is clear but exclusions are implicit rather than explicit.

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