List smart scopes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains that smart scopes are dynamic filters and that the tool returns scope ids usable with get_smart_scope_books. However, it does not mention pagination, ordering, or any side effects, though as a list operation it is likely safe.

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?

Two sentences, the first states the action clearly and the second provides a useful pointer. No filler or unnecessary details.

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 list operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and a how-to-use pointer. It lacks details about return format but is adequate for a straightforward 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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds context about the returned scope ids but does not need to explain input semantics. The baseline 4 for 0-param tools is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool lists the user's smart scopes and explains they are saved dynamic filters. It also distinguishes from sibling get_smart_scope_books by indicating the returned scope ids are used to read matching books.

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 explicitly says to use a returned scope id with get_smart_scope_books, giving a clear follow-up use case. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool, but the context implies it is for retrieving available smart scopes.

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