emule_list_downloads

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, but it only reveals that the tool returns a list of queued downloads. It does not describe edge behavior such as behavior when the queue is empty, ordering, or returned file metadata, though the read-only nature is inferable from 'List'.

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?

A single focused sentence that leads with the action and states the object being listed. No filler, redundancy, or unnecessary detail.

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, simple list operation, the description is nearly complete: it states the input scope and the resource. It could have described the return shape, but the meaning of 'list files' is clear enough without an output schema.

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, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4. The schema already fully covers the empty input set.

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 a specific resource ('files currently in eMule's download queue'), and 'currently' makes the scope clear. This distinguishes it from siblings like emule_download and emule_status without needing to inspect schemas.

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 purpose clear, so an agent can infer this is the tool for checking queued downloads. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over emule_status or emule_list_servers, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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