get_library_collections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It correctly indicates a read-only operation ('list'), but doesn't mention pagination, permissions, or what happens if no collections exist. For a simple list tool, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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 that conveys the entire purpose with no unnecessary words. Every part earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is listed. It could briefly mention that the result is an array of variable collections, but that is implied. No critical gaps.

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 input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying the scope ('from enabled team/community libraries'), which would otherwise be ambiguous. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and this description meets it.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'library variable collections', specifying they come from enabled team/community libraries. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_library_components (lists components) and get_local_components.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving library variable collections but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. No context about prerequisites or limitations is given.

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