list_docs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read-only operation by using 'list'. It does not mention side effects, rate limits, or performance, but for a simple list tool with no params, this is sufficient.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and efficiently conveys the scope and content.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (products/categories with counts and overviews). It gives a good high-level understanding, though a more explicit format detail would be ideal.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying the output includes article counts and section overviews. Baseline for no params is 4.

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 it lists 'all available documentation products/categories' with 'article counts and section overviews'. The verb 'list' is specific, and the resource is well-defined. It distinguishes from siblings 'search_docs' and 'read_doc' which are for searching and reading specific 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 description implies use when an overview of docs is needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Sibling tools suggest differentiation but no explicit guidance.

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