ide_examples

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently indicates a read-only operation via the verb 'List' and adds useful context about the example structure ('program + wiring + often tests/devices') and returned fields ('title and description'). This goes beyond a minimal statement, though it does not address edge cases like pagination or sorting.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. The parenthetical clarification adds valuable information without bloat, and every word contributes meaning. It is an example of efficient writing.

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 simple list tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description is complete. It specifies the scope ('IDE's bundled'), the content of examples, and the returned fields ('title and description'), giving an agent all needed information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the empty schema fully covers all inputs. Per the calibration baseline, a parameterless tool receives a 4. The description adds no unnecessary parameter complexity and is sufficient.

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 uses the verb 'List' and identifies the specific resource: the IDE's bundled breadboard example projects. It also clarifies what these projects contain (program + wiring + often tests/devices), making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from sibling examples like ik_examples.

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 this tool is for viewing bundled examples but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives such as ide_example or ik_examples. There is no mention of exclusions or specific scenarios, though the phrase 'IDE's bundled' gives some context.

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