List interaction profile

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the full burden. Description only states it lists preferences, implying a read operation but lacks disclosure of side effects, performance, memory usage, or any behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Succinct and clear.

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?

For a list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be more complete by specifying the returned data structure or fields. It mentions the content type but not the format.

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?

No parameters defined. Parameter count is 0, so baseline is 4. Description does not need to add parameter info, and it does not provide any, which is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists stored preferences from a specific store. Verb 'List' and resource 'collaboration and response-structure preferences' are specific. Distinguishes from siblings like 'get' or 'distill' tools, though similar list tools like 'list_style_habits' exist, but the resource is distinct.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_style_brief' or 'list_style_habits'. No exclusions or context provided for usage.

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