doc_list_repos

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds behavioral details: results are scoped to the active storage_path, an empty list means nothing is indexed there, and has_embeddings: false means word-only matching. These are useful context not available from the schema or annotation. It doesn't contradict the annotation.

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 three sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and then caveats. Every sentence earns its place with distinct value.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return information (repo identifier and storage location), the meaning of empty results, and the interpretation of a key row field. It leaves a few details implicit (e.g., what has_embeddings: true means), but the description is adequate for this context.

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 the schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. No parameter explanation is needed, and the description doesn't need to compensate for undocumented inputs.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List every indexed documentation repo with its identifier and storage location.' It explicitly frames the tool as the entry point for obtaining the repo id needed by other tools, distinguishing it from sibling tools without opening their 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 gives clear contextual guidance: 'Call it first to find out whether the docs you need are already indexed, and to get the repo id every other tool needs.' This is explicit about when to use it, though it does not mention alternatives or exclusions. A 4 fits 'clear context, no exclusions' rather than the full 5.

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