list_text_fonts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' signals a non-destructive read operation, and 'discoverable TrueType and OpenType fonts' defines the scope of what will be returned. It could add detail about whether results are system-wide or project-specific, but the core behavior is transparent.

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. It conveys the action, the resource type, and the format restriction efficiently.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema list operation, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what it will get (font listings) and the relevant format constraints. It stops short of describing the exact return shape, but the meaning is unambiguous enough for practical use.

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 accepts no parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The description correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than arguments, meeting the baseline for a zero-parameter tool.

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 verb (list) and identifies a distinct resource (discoverable TrueType and OpenType fonts). It clearly stands apart from siblings like measure_text or draw_text, which consume fonts rather than list them.

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 makes the tool's context clear: use it when you need to discover available fonts. It does not name alternatives, but no sibling tool shares this exact purpose, so explicit exclusions are unnecessary.

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