vk_list_cabinets

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds the exact JSON return shape and the security behavior that secret values are never returned, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, the second gives the return shape and safety caveat. There is no filler or redundant restating of annotations.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema and supporting annotations, the description covers the purpose, return values, and the secret-safety guarantee. Nothing material needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 input schema has zero properties, so the 0-parameter baseline applies. The description usefully tells the agent what the no-argument call returns, so parameter semantics require no further clarification.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('configured cabinets'), and the scope ('for this marketplace'), while also noting which cabinet is active. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like vk_add_cabinet or vk_use_cabinet.

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 framing as a read-only listing operation gives clear context for when to call it: to inspect configured cabinets and the active selection. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose and sibling set make the usage obvious.

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