List Properties

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details: returns a list of properties with domain, range, and label, and limits results to 50 by default. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise and well-structured with Args, Returns, and Examples sections. It front-loads the purpose and uses minimal but complete sentences. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 tool with 3 optional params and no output schema, the description covers all aspects: argument details, return value structure, and concrete examples. It is complete for an agent to understand and use 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?

Schema has 3 params with only 33% description coverage (ontologyUri has description). The description adds meaning for all params: ontologyUri as optional filter, propertyType as enum with default 'both', limit as max results default 50. It compensates for low schema coverage.

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 lists ObjectProperty and DatatypeProperty from an ontology or globally. It uses specific verbs and resource types, and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_property_details (which likely retrieves a single property) and explore_ontology (broader context).

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 explicit arguments, defaults, and examples (empty args, with ontologyUri). It implicitly guides when to use (listing properties) but does not state when not to use or alternatives. Still, the usage context is clear.

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