list_supported_formats

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose ('List supported file formats and conversion options') without describing what the output looks like, whether it returns a paginated list, or if there are any side effects. Since it is a read-only list operation, the behavior is implicitly safe, but the description does not elaborate 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?

The description is a single, succinct sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('List') and clearly states the object. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters and an 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, no parameters, and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand its purpose. The output schema will describe the return values, and the sibling tool names make it clear that this is a discovery tool. No additional context is necessary.

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 accepts no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because there are none. The schema confirms zero parameters and 100% coverage, leaving nothing ambiguous.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('supported file formats and conversion options'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (pdf_to_markdown, markdown_to_pdf, validate_file) by being an information/discovery tool rather than a converter or validator.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention that one might use this tool before converting to see available options, nor does it state any exclusions. There is no 'when to use' or 'use this instead of...' context.

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