list_flexible_asset_fields

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the include mechanism workaround, output format options, and the save_to_file behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly state read-only nature or mention any permissions or rate limits, but for a list operation the context is largely covered.

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 structured with a clear purpose sentence, a relevant implementation note, and an Args section. It is slightly lengthy but every part earns its place; the note is useful context. Front-loaded with the main verb.

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?

The description covers parameters, output format, and the save_to_file behavior. An output schema exists, so return details are partially handled. It lacks pagination or error handling, but for a list tool this is adequate. Overall complete enough for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: flexible_asset_type_id, output_format with enumerated values, and save_to_file with its effect. This adds meaningful semantic detail beyond the bare schema.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'field definitions for a flexible asset type,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_flexible_asset_types which list types. The note about using the include mechanism further clarifies what it does.

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 usage for retrieving field definitions of a flexible asset type but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not conditions. It mentions the include mechanism but no exclusions or alternative tool names, so guidance is only implied.

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