List bot modules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that each module's settings are returned; it says nothing about permissions, channel resolution behavior, or the shape of the result beyond a vague "settings" mention.

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 front-loaded sentence with a useful parenthetical illustration and no filler. Nothing is wasted, though it is short enough that a little more substance could have been added without bloat.

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 read-only list tool with full parameter coverage and safety annotations, this is largely adequate. However, with no output schema, the description does not indicate what the returned modules or their settings look like, leaving a modest gap.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single optional channel parameter is fully documented in the schema (24-char hex, default resolution order). The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the chat bot's modules") and clarifies the resource with concrete examples (8ball, roulette, duel, heist) and the fact that settings are included. This is clear enough to separate it from bot_get or bot_levels_list, though it never names or contrasts a sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus adjacent tools such as bot_get, bot_counter_get or bot_levels_list, and no prerequisites or caveats are stated. Usage is only implied by the verb "List."

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