quantity-takeoff__list_assemblies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as a listing operation, implying read-only behavior, but does not explicitly state safety, permissions, or return format. This is adequate for a simple list but lacks depth (e.g., no mention of side effects or access limitations).

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 but includes a bracketed prefix ('[quantity-takeoff — auditable construction material takeoffs (locked waste + purchase rounding)]') that adds domain context but is not directly about the tool's function. This slightly detracts from conciseness and front-loads 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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides comprehensive details on what is listed (assemblies, dimensions, formulas, waste defaults, material-pack digest). It covers the tool's output adequately for a list operation, though pagination or access restrictions are omitted.

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, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info because none is needed. Per guidelines, baseline 4 applies for zero parameters.

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 supported assemblies along with required dimensions, formulas, waste defaults, and the current material-pack digest. The verb 'List' and specific resources make the purpose unambiguous, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_assembly' (singular) and 'list_material_pack' (separate resource).

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, context for selection, or exclusions. For instance, it does not suggest using 'quantity-takeoff__get_assembly' for a specific assembly or indicate that this tool provides a digest of material packs.

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