Krita List Actions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of conveying behavior. 'List' indicates a read-only introspection operation, and the partial-name filter on name or display text is explicit. It does not dwell on side effects, but listing actions is inherently non-mutating, and missing return details are handled by the output schema.

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 sentence with a parenthetical delivers the core purpose and the key filtering behavior with zero wasted words. The most important information is front-loaded.

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: no required parameters, an output schema, and only two optional params with defaults. The description gives an agent everything needed to decide to invoke it and understand the filter behavior. No critical gap remains for this kind of enumeration tool.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully explains that 'filter' performs a partial-name match against either the action name or display text. The 'limit' parameter is only implicit in the schema default, but its meaning is self-evident for a list operation.

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 and resource: it lists Krita QAction names that can be run via krita_run_action. It also adds filter semantics, and the focus on actions distinguishes it from sibling tools like krita_list_brushes and krita_list_filters.

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 clearly ties the tool to its use case: discover QAction names for subsequent use with krita_run_action. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is strong enough for an agent to know when this tool applies.

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