list_slices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; 'List ... as JSON' clearly conveys a non-mutating read operation and the return encoding. However, it does not disclose error handling for missing/invalid filenames, ordering/filtering behavior, or what an empty slice set means.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the action, target, and return format, which is appropriately concise for a simple one-parameter read tool.

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 tool is simple and the description names the key output fields, but it leaves filename semantics and the exact JSON shape to inference. Without an output schema, an agent would benefit from more explicit context about what the returned JSON contains.

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 only parameter, filename, is never mentioned in the description, and the schema provides only type and minLength. With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to clarify whether filename is a path, asset name, or something else—and it does not.

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 uses a specific action ('List') on a specific resource ('slice bounds, centers, and pivots') and states the output format ('as JSON'). This clearly distinguishes it from mutation siblings like create_slice, set_slice_center, and delete_slice.

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 about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_sprite_info or inspect_sprite_geometry, and no conditions or exclusions are stated. The verb 'List' implies read-only inspection, but the description does not provide routing context.

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