List Targets

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

The verb 'List' conveys a read-only enumeration behavior, and 'available' suggests the result set is context-dependent. However, the description does not explain how availability is determined, what exactly counts as a target, or any behavior beyond returning a list. Since annotations provide no readOnlyHint or other safety signals, the description bears most of the burden but only partially fulfills it.

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 no wasted words. The core action and object are front-loaded, and the parenthetical adds clarifying examples without bloating the description.

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 parameterless list tool with an output schema present, little else is strictly required. The description names the target categories and implies an enumeration, which is enough for an agent to call it. The main gap is the lack of usage context relative to sibling listing tools, but this is a minor omission for such a simple operation.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and the description cannot add parameter-level meaning. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, this is sufficient.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List available targets' and elaborates with examples ('processors, loaders, languages, etc.'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings such as list_databases, since it targets a different object type.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives like list_databases or search_tools. The use case is only implied by the word 'List', but there is no explicit context or exclusions.

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