veto_patterns_list

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

The description truthfully states the tool returns patterns, consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds value by mentioning the filtering capability, but does not delve into other behavioral aspects like pagination or result format.

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 very concise: two sentences. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides a concrete usage example. No fluff.

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 simple listing tool, the description is adequate. It explains what it returns and how to filter. However, without an output schema, it could briefly mention the structure of returned patterns, but this is not a major gap given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description adds an example for the prefix parameter, which enriches understanding but does not significantly extend beyond the schema. The limit parameter is not elaborated beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns stored coding patterns with optional prefix filtering. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tool 'veto_pattern_store', which might also deal with patterns. Overall purpose is specific and clear.

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?

Provides an example of filtering by prefix ('prefix="naming."'), which gives usage guidance. However, there is no explicit advice on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use veto_pattern_store instead.

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