list_keybinds

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

The description discloses the returned fields and implies a read-only operation with no side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it adequately communicates the tool's safe, non-destructive nature. It does not detail formatting or possible empty results, but for a simple listing tool this is sufficient.

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?

The description is a single sentence that conveys the essential purpose and content. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema) and the sibling tools that are clearly different (e.g., list_windows), the description is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool does. It could mention that it returns a list of keybinding objects, but the explicit field names compensate for the lack of output schema.

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 has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. The baseline score of 4 is appropriate given the absence of parameters.

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 the resource 'all configured keybindings', and lists the included fields (modmask, key, dispatcher, argument). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list other resources like windows or workspaces.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or when not to use it. However, the resource name 'keybindings' implies usage for retrieving keybinding configurations, and there are no explicit alternatives mentioned. The guidance is only implied.

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