list_shaders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return shape (ids, type, imported), the default and conditional behavior of includeProperties, and the import prerequisite. It does not cover pagination, ordering, or error behavior, but the core behavioral profile is clear.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, front-loaded with the resource and its sources before the parameter caveat and the prerequisite. Slightly dense but every clause 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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies everything needed: what is returned, what is conditionally omitted and why, and the cross-tool workflow for applying shaders. Nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning: it explains the default (false) and the rationale for the parameter ('import_shader_by_id already returns them'), which tells the agent when to set it rather than just what it does.

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 (List) and resource (shader effects and fills), and scopes it precisely to 'available to this file' with the three sources enumerated. It also names the sibling tools import_shader_by_id and apply_shader, so an agent can distinguish it from related shader tools without opening schemas.

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?

Gives clear conditional guidance: omit properties by default because import_shader_by_id already returns them, and set includeProperties only when needed. It also states the workflow prerequisite that shaders with imported:false must be imported before apply_shader. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the context is unambiguous.

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