viridisos__viridis_list_modules

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it disclose any auth requirements or other behavioral traits. The cryptic phrase 'A-1 against the live canon' adds ambiguity.

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 wastes a full introductory sentence in brackets that seems to describe the overall system rather than the tool itself. The actual instruction is short, but the irrelevant preamble harms conciseness. It is not front-loaded with the tool's purpose.

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 that there is no output schema and no parameters, the description should clearly explain what is returned. It only mentions 'modules and their LIVE/BLOCKED state (A-1 against the live canon)', which is incomplete. The agent cannot infer the output structure (e.g., names, IDs, timestamps).

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 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not add any parameter meaning, but none is needed. It correctly indicates that the tool takes no arguments.

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 identifies the action: 'List ViridisOS modules and their LIVE/BLOCKED state'. While the preamble adds confusing context, the core purpose is specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like viridis_certify or viridis_bind_did.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The description fails to help the agent decide if this is the right tool for the current task.

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